Is EB 1.2 the most sophisticated turn based computer strategy wargame to this date?

[Gaius Sempronius Gracchus]

Ooh, Ooh, easy answer! Because you have an idyllic, false view of what a Puritan's life was like and an ignorant concept of Native Americans as dirty savages! As a Puritan, you have little to no freedom in daily life, your days are rigidly controlled by the village elders and the intense study of religion is compulsory. Plus the general prudishness. Life as a Native American in the same broad geographical region as the Puritans wasn't all frolicking in meadows, but it involves considerable more freedom and choice (especially for women), opportunity for travel, and by the standards of the time you're probably wealthier (unless one places unreasonably high values on cows and pigs) than your average Puritan. There's a number of reason why far more English immigrants in that period decided to live like the Native Americans did, as compared with Native Americans adopting an English lifestyle. (Not just racism and bigotry.)

Similarly, rather than marching on a path to some mythical "greatness," I think its much more realistic to understand that Caesar pretty much made Gaul and the Roman Republic shittier places than they were previously, at least for a generation or two. Assume you're going to be born to some random life in either location before or after Caesar. To my understanding the civil wars increased the turmoil and social problems in Italy, caused a considerable amount of death and economic disruption, and significantly increased the likelihood that in our fictional reincarnation lottery, you are born a slave. Similarly, slavery probably increased in Gaul and at the least the likelihood of becoming a free man of considerable property in the reincarnation lottery probably dropped in Gaul post-Caesar.

Though (as a side issue) I would question placing the blame for the civil wars entirely upon Caesar's shoulders (and most especially the era of the principate that followed - I have my doubts as to whether that 'sort of thing' was what Caesar had in mind), the main point is well made. In fact, prior to the aristocracies and their 'senates' within the Gallic 'proto-states', life as a lesser Gaul would likely have been much better. Those aristocracies were making their fortunes, and power bases, by essentially betraying their own people - feeding the slave markets of Rome with their 'bretheren' Gauls..... from what little information we have, these polities were oligarchic, the lesser classes becoming - even within their own country - all but slaves.

That's what Vercingetorix utilised with his 'army of the poor' - the dispossessed of the Gallic oligarchical structures, which were bound up with good relations/trade with the Romans. Orgetorix, Ambiorix, Dumnorix.., all were dealt with by those entities to the pleasure of Rome.

If anyone else is still paying attention, I'd also like to undercut at least a little bit the pervasive and subtle bias in favor of progressive historiography that pervades a lot of discussions on this forum. By 'progressive' I mean that a lot of people view history as a continuum from less-advanced to modern, with cultures progressing inevitably along that continuum to the present state of affairs (closely related to a similar assumption the human race will continue to "advance"). Whenever you catch yourself arguing that one culture is "behind" another, or "less-advanced," or especially something specific like "100 years behind," take a step back and realize you're understanding things through a false 'Sid Meier's Civilization' understanding of history, in which various and distinct 'cultures' advance along an inevitable and universal tech tree. Which, when you think about it, doesn't really hold much relation to reality.

Indeed. Cultures don't necessarily have to follow the same path..... I think that the Roman interference with much of Europe (and beyond) tends to suggest that this is so, in many peoples' minds. As a counter example I will offer Switzerland, and it's sovereign Cantons, it's Landsgemeinden - people's assemblies. Just because a culture/polity might not have become Rome, might not have subjugated it's own and it's neighbours people, doesn't mean that civilisation was beyond them. It just depends upon what you regard as civilised....

One thing that really grates is when I read something along the lines of 'We know that the Gauls were illiterate......'. We know no such thing. We have been told so, but look a little closer and little cracks appear in this version of history. Caesar refers to the alphabets that the Gauls used for different functions. The Helvetii had conducted a census of their tribes before (and for the purpose of) their migration. Dumnorix is attested as being granted the tolling and taxing rights of the Aedui - which require literacy and numeracy. He speaks of the Druids as being forbidden to write down their teachings.....