PDA

View Full Version : Civilizations that weren't mentioned by CA



JANOSIK007
02-25-2003, 00:58
Please I would like to know why have you chosen what you did? ( Within historical context ).

Thank You http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/tongue.gif

Spino
02-25-2003, 01:46
I chose the Iberians.

The Scythians- Possibly. Barbarians but I can't see them as a Minor faction. Plenty of skirmishes with the Seleucids and Parthians or anyone else who takes over those regions.

The Slavs- Possibly. I think they're a touch early for RTW. At best troublesome barbarian tribes to the north.

The Sarmantians- No?? Good call but I think they are a 50-100 years too early for the time period depicted in RTW.

The Iberians- Definitely. Saguntum was a major Iberian city state. Let's not forget the Celt-Iberians either At best both should be Minor factions.

The Balts- No. Help me with this one. Who were they and what was their relation to Rome?

The Turks- NO They don't come until much later.

The Thracians- Yes. Minor faction sandwiched between Macedonia and Pergamon Monarchy (Successor Kingdom).

The Dacians- Yes but not the Dacians of later fame you're thinking of. They became civilized sometime during the 1st century BC but didn't rumble with Rome until much later. At most a Minor faction.

Heraclius
02-25-2003, 05:01
I'm not sure but I think the Balts were a Baltic people, don't remember seeing references to them until the Middle Ages though. I too voted for the Iberians: they were a real thorn in Rome's side for many years

JANOSIK007
02-25-2003, 05:09
Tell me more about Iberian culture. I didn't get to hear much about them, except that they were short and had darker skin.

deejayvee
02-25-2003, 07:32
Sorry if this is a stupid question, but what are we choosing them for??

Longshanks
02-25-2003, 11:06
I voted for the Iberians. The Romans had plenty of scraps with them in the period the game covers. Iberians also made up a large portion of the Carthagian forces under Hannibal.

The Thracians should also be included though.

LRossaLordJimi
02-25-2003, 11:20
I like the Scythians because of their fine art (they are great manifacturer of gold) and their great cavalry : all steppen civilitations have a deep feeling and knowledge of horse.
Ave

Catiline
02-25-2003, 15:14
the scyths would provide a nice variation to hte game. Combined with some Samatian heavy cavalry and you've got a pretty menacing cavalry army.

JANOSIK007
02-25-2003, 17:48
Quote[/b] (deejayvee @ Feb. 25 2003,00:32)]Sorry if this is a stupid question, but what are we choosing them for??
The CA is still adding factions to RTW. Maybe we could give them some ideas. Hopefully they get to see this.

I would like to know if the devs get to see this poll and if any of the factions mentioned here, are being considered.

Leet Eriksson
02-25-2003, 17:50
turks??i was wondering....where do they start out?

Sainika
02-25-2003, 17:55
I voted for Scythians. Excellent horsemen. I hope there will be lots of them as rebels - just to be historically accurate.

Longshanks
02-25-2003, 21:49
Quote[/b] (faisal @ Feb. 25 2003,10:50)]turks??i was wondering....where do they start out?
The Turks would still be in central Asia somewhere during this time period. They really shouldn't be included, unless the map is massive.

Heraclius
02-26-2003, 04:03
Quote[/b] (JANOSIK007 @ Feb. 24 2003,22:09)]Tell me more about Iberian culture. I didn't get to hear much about them, except that they were short and had darker skin.
Did some research, Janos. Found out a little about the Iberians. The Celts migrated out of central Europe around 1000 BC and by the 6th century had invaded northern Spain. The so-called "La Tene" Celtic culture of France and Germany, characterized by geometric designs and stylized animals never spread to Celtic Spain and by the early 400's a new culture in Spain had emerged a fusion of Celtic and Iberian and so the "Celtiberian" culture, peoples and kingdoms were born. These were the guys who were such a pain in the ass to Rome for many years.
After their protectors Carthage were forced to withdraw from Spain in 206, the Celtiberian culture fell to Rome except in the northwest which was not conquered until 19 BC. However the rest of Spain was too disunited to provide real resistance against Rome and the Celtiberian oppida, fortified strongholds, were no match for Roman siege engines or bribes. Still, periodical revolts were common for many years. Hope that helps, Janos

JANOSIK007
02-26-2003, 05:52
Thanks Heraclius.

Did any major battles occured Between Iberians and Romans?
Gaul at least united and put up a major fight ( fielding 100k of wild Celts in one of the battles. )

ShadesWolf
02-26-2003, 07:45
While doing some work on a new page for Rome: total war.co.uk (http://www.rometotalwar.co.uk/nations/egyptmain.htm) I have come across the successor kingdoms, these sprang up after the fall of the Empire of Alexander. My feeling are these will play a major part in the game. These empires controlled the eastern part of the map as Rome was developing.

I have currently only looked at Ptolemaic Egypt. (which I need to mod - as the above page is only a rough draft) The other I will need to look at in turn, but the history of this period and empires is quite interesting. Generals killing heirs to the thrown, other general marrying sisters of the former emperors and then being killed before they get to there new homes and marry....... I feel there is plenty of scope in this area for the game.

However, all these empires were basically Greek city states, so they would fight using a similar style.

Toda Nebuchadnezzar
02-26-2003, 20:25
Nice looking site you got there Shade. Hope its finished soon so i can browse it fully.


By the way, I know why the game is covering such a short timespan, but were the Huns ever a major threat before Atilla who was around 600 A.D. ???

Because they are my favourite civilisation. The predecessors to the Mongols, and they proved they were good enough to defeat Rome. (although Rome was crumbling at the time)

Heraclius
02-26-2003, 22:24
Quote[/b] (JANOSIK007 @ Feb. 25 2003,22:52)]Did any major battles occured Between Iberians and Romans?
Gaul at least united and put up a major fight ( fielding 100k of wild Celts in one of the battles. )
I think the battle where Rome broke the power of the Celtiberian kingdoms forever was at the 20 year siege of Numantia which ended 133 BC. Although, like I said in a previous post, the Celts of Brigantium in northwest Spain held out until 19 BC.

Longshanks
02-26-2003, 23:34
Quote[/b] (Heraclius @ Feb. 25 2003,21:03)]
Quote[/b] (JANOSIK007 @ Feb. 24 2003,22:09)]Tell me more about Iberian culture. I didn't get to hear much about them, except that they were short and had darker skin.
Did some research, Janos. Found out a little about the Iberians. The Celts migrated out of central Europe around 1000 BC and by the 6th century had invaded northern Spain. The so-called "La Tene" Celtic culture of France and Germany, characterized by geometric designs and stylized animals never spread to Celtic Spain and by the early 400's a new culture in Spain had emerged a fusion of Celtic and Iberian and so the "Celtiberian" culture, peoples and kingdoms were born. These were the guys who were such a pain in the ass to Rome for many years.
After their protectors Carthage were forced to withdraw from Spain in 206, the Celtiberian culture fell to Rome except in the northwest which was not conquered until 19 BC. However the rest of Spain was too disunited to provide real resistance against Rome and the Celtiberian oppida, fortified strongholds, were no match for Roman siege engines or bribes. Still, periodical revolts were common for many years. Hope that helps, Janos
The Celt-Iberians were actually a seperate people from the Iberians. Celt-Iberians were a fusion of the native Iberians and Celtic invaders/immigrants from a few centuries before. They spoke Celtic languages, and had cultural traditions from both ethnic groups. Like the Iberians, they were slightly more settled and civilized than their Gallic cousins. The Celt-Iberians mostly lived in what is today Northeast Spain, and were divided into many factions, the biggest being the Arevaci, Belli, Titti, and Lusones.

Their fighting style was also a hybrid of Celt and Iberian. The bulk of the Celt-Iberians armies were Scutari. They wore Iberian tunics,leather or mail armor, Celtic style helms and the Celtic scutum.(shield)Swords similar to those used by the Gauls were used, as well as fine short swords called the gladius hispanicus.(the Romans admired these short swords so much they adopted them for their own infantry)


The Iberians were the original inhabitants of Spain. There were many factions, but the major ones were the Lusitani, the Vaccaci, the Oretani and the Turdetani. Sadly not much is really known about them, but they are believed to have been a people who pre-dated the Indo-European migrations in Western Europe. They were generally short and dark-haired unlike the Celts, and slighly more settled and civilzed than the Celts.(though still barbaric compared to Greeks, Phoenicians or Romans)The Iberians spoke languages which were not Celtic, and not related to the Indo-European languages. The modern day Basques believe they are the direct descendants of the Iberians, and some of the words in the Basque language are Iberian...but there is much debate on whether the Basques are the descendants of the Iberians. They were mostly farmers and town dwellers, while the Celt-Iberians were slightly more rural and had a greater dependance on herding.

The Iberian armies were largely composed of Caetrati. They wore Iberian tunics, leather or mail armor, and small bucklers called a caetra. Many used basic infantry spears, although they also used a specialized Iberian spear called a soliferrum, which was completely made of iron with a barbed head. The spear was heavy, but its weight gave it an increased ability to punch through shields and armor. Some also used a curved slashing sword called the falcata.

The Iberians also had excellent slingers, especially those from the Balearic Islands. The Macedonians, Carthagians and Romans all used balearic slingers at one time or another.

The cavalry for both the Iberians and Celt-Iberians was basically identical, and very good. For the most part they used the same equipment as the infantry. After Carthage conquered part of Hispania, they relied heavily on Iberian and Celt-Iberian cavalry. They had large numbers of Iberians and Celt-Iberians infantry in their armies as well.

Both groups, but especially the Iberians were good guerilla fighters, employing hit and run tactics against their more civilized enemies with some success.

Here is a basic map to give you an idea of the breakdown of where the various groups were situated in Hispania:

http://www.barca.fsnet.co.uk/Graphics/spain1.gif


Note that this map only lists the Celt-Iberians as one faction, even though there were many. Also, there were more Iberian factions than just the ones shown.


EDIT: The tribal factions listed north of the Ebro river on the map are neither Iberians or Celt-Iberians. They are Aquitani. Like the Iberians they were of pre-Celtic stock. They lived in what northeast Iberia and Southwestern Gaul.

Heraclius
02-26-2003, 23:44
who exactly were Sarmantians? I' never heard of them Any know somethin about them?

Longshanks
02-27-2003, 00:00
Quote[/b] (Heraclius @ Feb. 26 2003,15:24)]I think the battle where Rome broke the power of the Celtiberian kingdoms forever was at the 20 year siege of Numantia which ended 133 BC.
Yep, although it was the Lusitani(Iberians) who fought at Numantia. Those wars between the tribes in Spain and Rome are often called the Celtiberian Wars, but its a bit of a misnomer. Much of what is today Spain was fighting against the Romans, both Iberian and Celt-Iberian.

Heraclius
02-27-2003, 00:08
Thank you for the helpful corrections Longshanks. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif I guess I will have to look for a new classical history book

Heraclius
02-27-2003, 22:40
I was completely wrong about the Balts. Sorry. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif I was right, however, that they were a Baltic people who survived by farming, independent of the Slavs and Germans that surrounded them. The first known reference to them is in 1800 BC. Sorry again for the misinformation.

JANOSIK007
02-28-2003, 01:03
Have any of you guys heard of Danubian Slavs?
I have just came across this interesting fact.
Apparently there were some Slavs living aroynd Danube before Germans and Celts.

Check it out
http://www.panslavia.com/history/index.html
This is a new info to me.

Heraclius
02-28-2003, 02:58
JANOS, JANOS, JANOS, tsk, tsk, tsk. I don't mean to be patronizing http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif but you must take everything you read on the internet with a grain of salt (meaning don't trust everything you see). Notice the website panslavia.com. The pan-slavic movement seeked and still does to unite all slavs into one nation. Among other things these guys assassinated Franz Ferdinand and so arguably brought on world war one. They wish to make the case for Slavic unity using political, economic and historical arguments. I mean seriously read the article. Oh, yes, they claim, the brave slavic people of the Danube were savaged by "primitive German and Hungarian nomadic hunters". This is bad enough but the claim to have invented writing and "known it for thousands of years before the Sumerians" and brought it to them is downright ridiculous. I hope this is meant as a joke, right, JANOS? You know something we can all http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/joker.gif about? Right?

Kraxis
03-01-2003, 23:34
Quote[/b] ]Don't be confused by the terminoloy Carpatho-Danubian people. It was invented to mask the fact that the THE ONLY Carpatho-Danubian people ever were the Slavs, our ancestors. Nobody else.

A little arrogant... It also sounds like a little child yelling that this thing is his/hers.


Quote[/b] ]who have brutally attacked and subjugated the developed but peaceful and defenseless Carpatho-Danubian Slavs

Let me tell you, no people has ever been so peaceful that they have been defenseless, much less back then when migrations were happening. The strong survived, the the less strong were subjugated.

But I must admit the articles about the writing are most interesting, the one about the Veneti is a little farfetched though.

Also who woted for the Turks??? Those guys were running around in the area around Turkmenistan (see the resemblance in name?) back then. They didn't even have any idea of going west after the Huns did so (that might have inspired them). They did create their own more or less nomadic empire, The Gök-Türk Empire in the 400s or so AD. It was quite massive in size easily dwarfing many other empires, though the number of people in it must have been rather low (the central asian steppes have never been a place of high population and the Persian Empire stopped them from getting to the more populous areas).

Galestrum
03-02-2003, 00:59
please dont get Janos started about slavs, he will start blaming the west and their ignornace for everything http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

baz
03-02-2003, 16:10
i know little about history of this time, thnx for the info guys greta work http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

JANOSIK007
03-02-2003, 17:49
I admit that the stuff about Danubian Slavs sounds like a bad propaganda. Though the facts about the writting are interesting. There are some linguists who have done some studies on ancient cultures ( Venetti, Macedonian, and Danubian Slavs ) and they have linked them to proto-Slavic group. Notice: they say proto-Slavic not Slavic.

Suit yourself and do a research on your own. Just type Ancient Slavs on Google and you'll see many sources that confirm these informations. It's interesting, but I just don't know how seriously should I take this.

Get back with us here with your own conclusion on this. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

Heraclius
03-02-2003, 21:19
I agree with you, Janos, about how seriously this stuff should be taken. I took up your suggestion and did a little research of my own but I what I found confirmed what we know of the Slavs as an Eastern European/steppe people, unique and rich in culture, but certainly not the masters of a large empire or the ancestors of all modern Europeans.
I did find two or three sites that claimed the Veneti as a Slavic people (very shaky) and another Iranian nationalist site that claimed the Croats as ancient Iranians and not Slavs. I'm not sure how credible this one was either. (the term "bigot Slavs" etc was used an awful lot). As for linguistic similarites almost all European and some Indian and Central Asian languages are descended from a common source so I would not take a few similar words as proof of shared ethnicity.
I'm not sure if you convinced me about the Slavic origin of Europe but I must say it was quite interesting and rather fun to research. Well done, Janos. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

Kraxis
03-05-2003, 22:17
Well there is a reason our languages share some resemblance with ancient Indian. Our languages come from Indo-European, so it makes sense that (ancient) Indian has similarities.

Leet Eriksson
03-05-2003, 22:40
The iranians are of Indo-European origin,so its possible the croats are...still need more research for a valid assesment.