Map Thread XVIII

Status
Not open for further replies.
Vuu

Vuu

Banned
CalBear said:
Were the Vikings a civilization? The Picts? The Cherusci?
Click to expand...
Depends on how one looks at it, really

For me, it's more of an gradient, however if we were to draw a line at half, the (early) Vikings would barely make it, the Picts and Ainu I'm not sure. Picts would probably be right under the mark, probably the Ainu even more so. But depends on how he thinks
 

Bleh

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't the term "civilization" come about as a means of distinguishing European society from other cultures that were considered more barbarian? Its vagueness as a concept, and the subsequent difficulty in answering the question of "what is a civilization?", seems to me to be very much inherent to its intended use as a construct; sort of a "you know it when you see it" type of thing.
 

TheScottishMongol

Banned
I think "civilization" is a completely arbitrary and ahistorical term, and if you use it for any group you're applying a foreign term to them in an inherently exclusionary manner - defining what a "civilization" is just creates a category of "the uncivilized". Its use in the Civilization series of video games is completely divorced from actual historical context, which is fine because it's a video game series not a form of academic historiographical research.

I mean, they have "Greeks" be a civilization, but also "Byzantines" and "Romans". These are completely arbitrary separations and none of these groups would have defined themselves in such a way - the Byzantines were culturally Greek and identified as a continuation of Rome.
 

Orko

I think that outside of ancient anthropology and archaeology, the term "civilization" is at best useless an at worst harmful and offensive. If you're using the term to distinguish a historical group of people who share some cultural, ethnic, societal, and geographic similarities, and can't be described better by any other term, then I'd say it's legitimate use of the term (for example, I think it's right to call the Sumerians a civilization, as they spoke the same language, worshipped the same gods, inhabited the same land, and had trade and diplomatic relations between each other, despite never clearly organizing themselves as a unique separate entity, political or otherwise, that can actually be called "the Sumerian civilization"). Using it in later historical contexts makes usage of the term tricky at best (I mean, who was the civilization of medieval Europe? Was each principality its own civilization? Was each kingdom or empire? or was all of Christian Europe one civilization? Based on what distinction?), and if you think the term is still relevant for describing modern societies then, well, boy have I got some news for you.
 

Jamee999

Oh boy, how about those maps. Maps sure are great, don't you guys think? Love those borders and labels and color schemes and all that good stuff. Maps maps maps maps maps. Maps.
 
DracoLazarus

DracoLazarus

Alright.
More on my WIP.
'Cuz maps.
GBF1914_1939.png
 

CalBear

Moderator
Donor
Monthly Donor
TheDetailer said:
I'm pretty sure that they technically were, sure they weren't as organized compared to their neighbors (atleast that I know of), but I don't think that means they can't be counted as a civilization.

The Vikings, for example, managed to influence Britain and Scandinavia for a couple hundred years, and I'm pretty sure 'uncivilized' people can't do that.
Click to expand...
Actually the Norse (since I had my hand swatted for using the term Viking as a group identifier), went well beyond influence into actual rule of over half of Britain i.e. the Danelaw.
 

B_Munro

Ivoshafen said:
Any group with the ability to organize themselves into collectives for mutual benefits should be able to count as civilizations
Click to expand...

How big is "a collective?" A cultural complex? An alliance of villages? Me and the two dudes who agreed to help me move my couch?

TheScottishMongol said:
the Byzantines were culturally Greek and identified as a continuation of Rome.
Click to expand...

Not that any 1st century BC Roman would have agreed with them. :biggrin:

Personally, I suspect that civilizations, like nation-states, are things that need to exist in people's heads to be meaningful.
 
Ivoshafen

Ivoshafen

B_Munro said:
How big is "a collective?" A cultural complex? An alliance of villages? Me and the two dudes who agreed to help me move my couch?



Not that any 1st century BC Roman would have agreed with them. :biggrin:

Personally, I suspect that civilizations, like nation-states, are things that need to exist in people's heads to be meaningful.
Click to expand...
Obviously two dudes and a couch wouldn't count as a civilization :p
But a tribe of dudes, who formed a tribe to move as many couches as possible? That's getting closer to what I'm talking about

In the end of the day, it's just a bunch of semantics.
 

AUGGP

Heres a question: why did a debate start on what constitutes a civilization based on a Map that was created based on a game of the video game Sid Meier's Civ (6?) Lol.
 
Clandango

Clandango

All this talk reminds me. Anyone have good maps of cities? I mean the sort that comes from the town games on here. I very much enjoyed participating in the Blackwall one, and would like to read the story of another one.
 
Top
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top