Civilization V Solo Reports

[novice]

I didn't pick the city names, Firaxis did. But yes I too was struck by the anachronistic choices. Edinburgh and Dublin were not a Celtic union, they never belonged to one nation until coming under British sovereignty. Obscurity should be no obstacle whatsoever to Civ city names; how many of us ever heard of Pasargadae or Dur-Kurigalzu or Xochicalco?

Well the celts do also pose the problem that their 'empire' is abit hard to grasp. When the celts were THE cultural player they were widespread but had no empire. At least none is known. Afterall what is today considered 'celtic territories' is just the bit of lands they got pushed to while losing their original homes. Due to the Romans and germanic-tribes little is left from the original celtic cities in central europe. The most easy recognizeable (in german speaking regions) carry a name with Hall (example Hallstatt) but AFAIK the real celtic-names are lost for many (then important) places.

It doesn't help that CIV's model, in a general sense, conflates the nation state with culture.

Actually, the definition I've learned for a Nation State is a state whose political and cultural boundaries match*, so I'd rather say that all Civ nations are nation states.

*That's paraphrased. More(?) precisely, I've heard it defined as a nation whose borders match the extent of its ethnic group, and whose borders aren't home to any other ethnic groups. By this definition, there are only two nation states in all of Europe - do you know which?

[Sareln]

I didn't pick the city names, Firaxis did. But yes I too was struck by the anachronistic choices. Edinburgh and Dublin were not a Celtic union, they never belonged to one nation until coming under British sovereignty. Obscurity should be no obstacle whatsoever to Civ city names; how many of us ever heard of Pasargadae or Dur-Kurigalzu or Xochicalco?

Well the celts do also pose the problem that their 'empire' is abit hard to grasp. When the celts were THE cultural player they were widespread but had no empire. At least none is known. Afterall what is today considered 'celtic territories' is just the bit of lands they got pushed to while losing their original homes. Due to the Romans and germanic-tribes little is left from the original celtic cities in central europe. The most easy recognizeable (in german speaking regions) carry a name with Hall (example Hallstatt) but AFAIK the real celtic-names are lost for many (then important) places.

It doesn't help that CIV's model, in a general sense, conflates the nation state with culture.

Actually, the definition I've learned for a Nation State is a state whose political and cultural boundaries match*, so I'd rather say that all Civ nations are nation states.

*That's paraphrased. More(?) precisely, I've heard it defined as a nation whose borders match the extent of its ethnic group, and whose borders aren't home to any other ethnic groups. By this definition, there are only two nation states in all of Europe - do you know which?

Hmm. That's not the definition I learned at all, unsurprisingly given I was growing up in California. Is anything that contains more than one ethnic group supposed to be an empire then?

[novice]

Actually, the definition I've learned for a Nation State is a state whose political and cultural boundaries match*, so I'd rather say that all Civ nations are nation states.

*That's paraphrased. More(?) precisely, I've heard it defined as a nation whose borders match the extent of its ethnic group, and whose borders aren't home to any other ethnic groups. By this definition, there are only two nation states in all of Europe - do you know which?

Hmm. That's not the definition I learned at all, unsurprisingly given I was growing up in California. Is anything that contains more than one ethnic group supposed to be an empire then?

No, it can be a state or a country, just not a Nation State. But maybe the term doesn't translate well.

Edit: Or maybe it does:

na·tion-state
n.
A political unit consisting of an autonomous state inhabited predominantly by a people sharing a common culture, history, and language.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/nation-state

[Sareln]

In school, the terms were used interchangeably... therein the difference most likely.

[antisocialmunky]

Nation are groups of people sharing a common history. States are political entities. Nation States are states that encompass nations. Nation states are a comparatively recent phenomenon legally recognized in the Treaty of Westphalia. Nation states use the common history/culture to unit its people. However, this history often becomes mythic especially for nations consisting of 'loosely' associated cultures. Good examples of this in the old world (the US is too obvious) are France and India. Many different groups of people make up France historically from Celts, to Romanized Celts, to Goths, to other Germanic Tribes. And yet everyone growing up there is taught a French identity which may not correspond with the background of their family. Same thing with the modern state of India which historically hasn't been a single state since Asoka. And yet there's an Indian identity. There are also Nations without states such as the Kurds.

Honestly, I don't think there's much to talk about with regards to CIV. What CIV considers a Civilization/state is only for game purposes and does not reflect accurately on real life. Its meant as an abstraction so you can associate a civ with an cultural/historical/geopolitical notion for roleplaying and flavor purposes.

[NobleHelium]

Actually, the definition I've learned for a Nation State is a state whose political and cultural boundaries match*, so I'd rather say that all Civ nations are nation states.

*That's paraphrased. More(?) precisely, I've heard it defined as a nation whose borders match the extent of its ethnic group, and whose borders aren't home to any other ethnic groups. By this definition, there are only two nation states in all of Europe - do you know which?

I'd have to ask you to define ethnic group before that question can be answered. But yeah, there was a lot of emphasis over the concept of a nation state when World War II (and its prelude) was covered in the history courses that I took.

[antisocialmunky]

The word nation has actually become a less loaded replacement for ethnic group these days atleast when I was taking humanities.

[Rowain]

*That's paraphrased. More(?) precisely, I've heard it defined as a nation whose borders match the extent of its ethnic group, and whose borders aren't home to any other ethnic groups. By this definition, there are only two nation states in all of Europe - do you know which?

na·tion-state
n.
A political unit consisting of an autonomous state inhabited predominantly by a people sharing a common culture, history, and language.

I think the key-word is predominantly here. Your first definition is very strict but the later one gives room for a lot more nations. For example Austria would not be a Nation according to the first deffinition but a nation state according to the 2nd.

Of course there remains the question how long back the shared history has to go. If you look back long enough there is no nation left .

[novice]

Of course there remains the question how long back the shared history has to go. If you look back long enough there is no nation left .

There is at least one country in Europe which is without doubt a nation state. That one's

Iceland

The second one I had in mind was

Portugal

But yeah, it's not clear-cut.

[Rowain]

Of course there remains the question how long back the shared history has to go. If you look back long enough there is no nation left .

There is at least one country in Europe which is without doubt a nation state. That one's

Iceland

Depends. If you take into account that it was founded by norwegians and celts was part of Denmark and according to wikipedia:

In December 2007, 33,678 people (13.5% of the total population) living in Iceland had been born abroad, including children of Icelandic parents living abroad. Around 19,000 people (6% of the population) held foreign citizenship.

As said it only matters how far back you go and how strict you define it.

The second one I had in mind was

Portugal

But yeah, it's not clear-cut.

Given the lineage (celtic, romanic, germanic, arabic ....) and the fact that a lot of them live in Brazil it absoutly doesn't fit the first (strict) definition.

Of course the loose one fits but that does fir for nearly eveything (with the possible exceptions of Suisse and Belgium)