Great post as usual stratigos. Ive seen these maps a few times on Wikipedia but only just noticed it lists the Yuezhi as Tocharians rather than Aryans... controversial.Quote:
Originally Posted by stratigos vasilios
Printable View
Great post as usual stratigos. Ive seen these maps a few times on Wikipedia but only just noticed it lists the Yuezhi as Tocharians rather than Aryans... controversial.Quote:
Originally Posted by stratigos vasilios
There is a lot of academic debate about whether the Yuezhi are to be considered Indo-Iranian or Tocharian, or even turcic (although the arguments for the latter claim are rather weak). Given how many historians make the connection between the Yuezhi and Tocharians, I would perhaps not call it controversial. In fact, there has been some arguments made that the name Yuezhi, which in old chinese sounds something like "Ngwatieg" may actually be a chinese attmpt at rendering the word "tokhar". Further, greaco-roman sources mention the in the invasion of Baktria by nomads a number of tribes, among them one called Tocharii, and this invasion is in chinese sources ascribed to the Yuezhi. This too seems to link the Yuezhi to the Tocharians. That the Kushanas, whom the chinese still called Yuezhi, used Tocharian in some official texts also points this way, and Baktria later bacame known as Tokharistan.
However, one of the more plausible explanations is that the Yuezhi contained a large contingent of Tocharian speakers, but were not exclusively Tocharian, much like the Xiongnu is often described as an altaic people, altough some chinese sources describe them as red haired, which seems to imply the inclusion of Indo-european peoples within their ranks. Genreally, steppe tribal names often do not refer to a specific ethnic group, but is more of a collective name for all the tribes within a larger federation, much like the Huns were probably made up both of Turkic, Iranian and Scythian/Sarmatian people, and the Mongols that invaded Europe in the 13th century in fact contained pepole of various ethnic and linguistic origin. The Yuezhi most likely contained several diverse ethnic and linguistic groups, but it does not seem implausible that a subtsantial part of them were Tocharian, and the Tocahrian theory seems to be the most prevalent veiw among scholars today.
Hi everybody,
I also have some suggestions and I know that shurely most of them already were called :) So have a look:
-->
Barbarian Culture:
- Caledonians/Picts (Scotland)
- Brigantes (Northern England + Part of Ireland)
- Iceni (Eastern England)
- Belgae (Belgium & Southern England)
- Aedui (between Loire & Saone)
- Arverni (middle east of France)
- Boii (Northern Italy + Bohemia)
- Sweboz/Suebi (Germany)
- Lugii (South Poland)
- Gothones (Baltic Sea)
- Lusitanians (Portugal)
- Callaeci/Astures (Northern Spain)
- Celtiberians (Central Spain)
- Dacians (Rumania)
- Illyrian Tribes (Croatia/Bosnia)
Nomadic Culture:
- Scythians (Blach Sea Coast of Rumania/Ucraine)
- Sarmatians/Roxolani/Aorsi (Ucraine/South Russia)
- Alani (Caspian Sea)
- Saka (Southern Kazakhstan/Kyrgistan)
- Yuezhi/Kushana (Central Asia/ Eastern China)
- Xiongnu/Huns? (Mongolia/Eastern China)
Eastern-Persian Culture:
- Parthia
- Greco-Bactrian (Afghanistan)
- Armenia/Hayastan (Eastern Turkey)
- Atropatene/Media (North-West Iran)
Indian or Eastern Culture:
- Gandhara (North Pakistan)
- Magadha/Maurya (North India)
Greek Culture:
- Seleucids (Lebanon, Syia, Iraq, Iran)
- Ptolemaics (Egypt, Cyprus, Southern Turkey)
- Macedons (Northern Greece, Macedonia, Boeotia)
- Sparta (Southern Peloponnes)
- Pontic (North-Eastern Turkey)
- Pergamon (West-Turkey)
- Syracuse (East Sicily)
- Bosporians (Crimea)
- Epeiros + Magna Graecia (Albania, Southern Italy)
- Aetolian League (Lokris)
- Independent Greek Cities (Athen, Massilia, Cyrene, Rhodes, Creta, Elis, Byzantion, Bythnia)
Roman Culture:
- Romans (Central Italy)
Semitic Culture:
- Carthage (Tunisia, Andalusia, Baleares, Sardina, Corse, West Sicily, West Lybia)
- Numidians (Algeria)
- Garamantes (Sahara, Lybia)
- Nabataeans (Jordan, Red Sea Coast)
- Sabaeans (Yemen)
African or Semitic Culture:
- Meroe/Nubians (Sudan)
- Aksum (Eritrea, Ethiopia)
- Mauri/Moors (Morocco)
So that's it, I know there are a lot of factions, but not all of them have to be included as playable factions.
And of course it depends on which date the game will start and how big the map is.
All the factions in EB will be in EBII (with the exception of the Casse who became the Pritanoi) so you don't need to list them. Apart from that quite a few of those suggestions don't fit with our time frame (272BC-14AD) or map, i.e. Mauryans, Xiongnu, Kushans, Picts and Gothones (probably around in our time frame but way too little is known about them and they would not be organised enough to merit being a faction)
Welcome to the forums btw!
It is veeeeeery interesting that you did not list the Yuezhi among those not on the map :yes:Quote:
Originally Posted by bobbin
Welcome to the forum, Apollon! ~:wave:
You think?Quote:
Originally Posted by Oh! TheLastDays!
Sometimes I do, yes :yes:
but sir.. this is the internet! you just can't do itQuote:
Originally Posted by Oh! TheLastDays!
:stop: thinking right there!
awesome comment ;) have some balloon :balloon2:
I just forget them, the Yeuzhi will not be a faction.Quote:
Originally Posted by Oh! TheLastDays!
More conspiracy and diversion tactics!Quote:
Originally Posted by bobbin
The Yeuzhi won't, but what about the Yuezhi?! :clown:
Haha well done OTLD! :laugh:
Rats, you found me out!
Welcome to the forum! For a first post i think it sets a record for size. With regards to the factions listed I hope you wont mind a constructive critique of the list you have provided?Quote:
Originally Posted by Apollon_BE
Firstly the three Brythonic tribes you have listed. In addition to the team already ruling out any other British tribes the problem is we cannot be certain when these tribal groups formed. Although ceramic evidence from Britain does show continuity from the 5th century BC until the Roman invasion this would only work for the Catuvellauni/Trinobantes (Casse) and Atrebates (Belgae). The ceramic evidence is lacking for Northern Britain and much of Scotland, thus we wannot be sure when the Brigantes and Caledonii came into eixstence. If our experience of Native American nations is any guids then it is likely these tribal groups only emerged as a result of the Claudian invasion of 43AD.
The Belgae may or may not be a faction, there are some strong arguments in their favour and as yet they have not been ruled out (there is a thread kicking around here which i started which discusses the Belgae more throroughly if you want a more in depth analysis).
The Aedui, Arverni, Sweboz, Lugii and Lusitanians are all confirmed factions and will appear in EBII.
The Dacians (in the form of the Getae) are likewise a confirmed faction.
The Celtiberians are a strong possiblity of a faction, the Arevaci in particular were an expansive, dominant force in the region who would be suitable as an EBII faction.
The Callaeci and Astures were not unified enough, nor developed enough to warrant being an EBII faction. This lack of unity enabled them to remain outside of Roman control until Octavians campaigns however there are far more suitable nations to include.
The Illyrians would make a suitable faction although by this point in history they were second rate powers behind Celtic tribes like the Scordisci. Furthermore the EBII has, as far as I know, ruled them out.
I cannot comment on the Gothones as I know too little about them.
The Scythians were in terminal decline by 272BC, in the processs of being absorbed or driven out by the Sarmatians.
The Sarmatians and Saka are EBII factions.
The Alani are represented by the Sarmatians, we cannot be sure if they were a seperate tribal group by this point.
The Yuezhi and Xiongu were not present on the EBII map in 272BC. The Yuezhi do not appear in this area until c.190BC and the Xiongu/Huns not until the 4th century AD.
The Parthians, Baktrians and Hayasadan are all EBII factions whilst there are theories that Atropatene may also be a faction, as yet the team has not commented.
The Indians are likewise represented by the satrapy of Takashilla (spelling is likely wrong).
Seleucids, Ptolemies, Bosporans, Pergamon, Pontus and Epeiros are all confirmed EBII factions.
Sparta and the minor Greeks are currently represented in EB by the Koinon Hellenon but the EBII team has said that this arrangement may be altered.
As yet no word on the Aetolians, although another Greek faction is extremely unlikely.
Syracuse, although a favourite of many was in a slow decline by 272BC. Although earlier tyrants like Dionysus I had proven to be very international rulers, and although a thorn in the side of Carthage for centuries, Syracuse was increasingly a Roman satellite during the EBII timeframe (with one disastrous exception being the second Punic war). Furthermore Syracuse has been rules out by the team.
Romans are confirmed, much to the horror of everyone who fights them.
Carthage and Sabeans are likewise confirmed as are the Numidians. The remaining factions will either not be included as they were not sufficiently unified (Garamantines) or due to limitations with culture slots (Meroe, Askum).
Just a short note on this: We do actually have the Xiongnu taking control of the Tarim Basin already in 175 BC under the Shan-yü Modun, and possibly even making forays into the Ferghana valley. This was part of their conquest of the Yuezhi and other minor states in the southern Tarim, which forced the Da Yuezhi out of the Tarim and into the Ily river valley and Issyk-köl area, and eventually Central Asia, where they formed the Kushan Empire. Hence, the Xiongnu were present on our map long before the AD era, however, they were too far east in 272 BC.Quote:
Originally Posted by Brennus
Just another quick note, the Alani are not part of the Sarmatians in EB, they are found in one of the rebel regions north of the Parthians. They were most likely around by EB's start date, although they only appear in written records around 100BC, where they are called the Yancai.Quote:
Originally Posted by Brennus
Gentlemen, I am richer for your knowledge. Thank you.
As a matter of fact, there exist a few differing theories about the origins of the Alani. One of the most intriguing identify them, through their name, with the Wusun of the Ily Valley, themselves often identified with the Issedones of Herodotos (the name Wusun is pronounced something like Oo-sun). This would fit with them moving wsetwards from their homelands, pushed by the Xiongnu, in the mid 2nd century BC (they defeated the remaining Yuezhi in the 130's BC), eventually arriving in the area where we find them showing up as Yancai some 30 years later.Quote:
Originally Posted by bobbin
Another theory connects them with the Asii of Pompeius Trogus, however, and thus the leading tribe in the nomadic onslaught that destroyed the Graeco-Bactrian kingdom, and flung Parthia into its dark ages. This is particularly interesting, as it mentions them as dominating the Tocharii, usually identified as the Yuezhi, which seeems consistent with the Wusun defeating the latter in the Ily area, but could have some interesting implictaions on the settling of the Yuezhi in Baktria, and the foundation of the Kushan Empire.
This is all based on a lot of conjecture however, and properly identifying the different political units in the steppes is always difficult, as ethnic and linguistic boundaries are often fleeting, and the names of tribal entities change as various groups gain or lose contol over the fragile steppe federations.
I just noticed bobbins occultus symbol has a bird of some kind in it. I have highlighted it for people:
Attachment 3095
If you can't see it too well check out bobbins homepage, its much clearer there.
Does anyone know much apology ornithology? From what I can see it looks like some kind of raptor, and what little I do know leads me to suggest its from warmer climes.
If it's a bird and I see what you see I'd tend towards an eagle not a vulture like someone suggested in the other thread...
I will accept that image only as horse's front legs, ie celtiberians! :D
Btw lately I've read how Atropatene was just a mountain kingdom, impregnable, but able only to switch allegiances; so not so sure about them anymore...
Until people began suggesting Atropatene I had never heard of them. I would still say, from what I know at least, that they would be a power, after all Takashila (most likely incorrectly spelled) and Kimerrios Bosporos are included and neither of them amounted to much in terms of expansion (certainly the Mauryan Empire itself did but it took until Demetrios of Baktria to form another powerful expansive sate in Northern India, at least as far as I know).Quote:
Originally Posted by Arjos
With you 110% of the way in asking for the Celtiberians.