Ptolemies and Architecture

[Thorfinn the Shallow Minded]

One aspect of 0 A D. that currently is problematic is the architecture for the Ptolemies.  In this Hellenistic period, the way that buildings looked was fundamentally Greek.  For instance, if you look at pictures of ruins in Alexandria and modern artistic attempts to copy this, the fact that it was a Hellenistic culture is undeniable.  While it can be argued that there were other more Egyptian-like areas, Alexandria was the centre of Greek culture.  While there is the argument that this makes the game look more flavourful, the blatant inaccuracies it portrays are unacceptable given the core vision of 0 A.D.  Here is a reference picture:

The current depiction of buildings is as if the Seleucids used the Persian architectural set.  I am not saying that there should be a total abandonment of Egyptian motifs in the architecture; they should just be more nuanced.  In the Alexandrine catacombs, there are examples of fusions of Egyptian and Greek art, scene here: 

As the set look right now, the buildings look like they were from the 18th Dynasty, seen in this screenshot.

I am not against some structures that are more economic in nature such as granaries, storehouses, and houses retaining these aspects; many native Egyptians remained living a rather native Egyptian lifestyle, but the other aspects need to change if there is to be any effort to maintain an accurate depiction of Ptolemies.

Edited May 25, 2018 by Thorfinn the Shallow Minded
An image did not attach properly.

[Sundiata]

@Thorfinn the Shallow Minded I agree with you to some degree, and many other people including myself have remarked on this topic before. I'd like to link to this post, which addresses just that ( @LordGood already made Hellenistic Ptolemaic house variants, but apparently they weren't committed or at least I didn't see them in-game)...

 

The updated models:

 

1 hour ago, Thorfinn the Shallow Minded said:

 In this Hellenistic period, the way that buildings looked was fundamentally Greek.

 The Hellenistic look was largely limited to Alexandria, Naukratis and Ptolemais Hermiou, and even Naukratis and Ptolemais Hermiou were probably more Egyptian looking with the addition of Greek temples. So we definitely need to Hellenize some structures, but definitely shouldn't exaggerate it either, because the vast majority of the population was still Egyptian, and lived in a typically Ancient Egyptian style, similar to the New Kingdom. This even continued into the Roman period, and even in the early Christian period, churches were often just repurposed ancient Egyptian temples. Many rural Egyptian villages today still look quite similar to Dynastic Egyptian villages...

 

1 hour ago, Thorfinn the Shallow Minded said:

As the set look right now, the buildings look like they were from the 18th Dynasty, seen in this screenshot.

They actually don't look 18th dynasty at all. They're total fantasy (except the granary)... That Greco-Roman kiosk looks like the only structure that actually used a reference, but even that is Roman (Trajan's temple on Philae island, border area with Lower Nubia)

 

That having said, it would be good to keep the Egyptian barracks for native troops, and a Hellenistic barracks for Hellenistic units. 

 

I'd also like reiterate to the need for some marginal overlap between Ptolemies and Kushites (like the Hellenic civs, but not so extreme), and the best way to do this is have half of the house-variants for both Kush and Ptolemies be Egyptian style house models which should be the same for both civs, but using their own respective textures and props. The other half of Ptolemaic houses should be LordGoods updated Hellenistic versions and the other half of the Kushite houses should remain those pretty Nubian vaulted homes. This would provide a perfect and historical overlap and cultural uniqueness at the same time:

 

 

 

Edited May 25, 2018 by Sundiata

[Thorfinn the Shallow Minded]

I think that in many ways we actually agree.  I was not entirely arguing for a copy and paste of some Greek set, but even if the architecture was limited to just places like Alexandria and Naukratis, these were the centres of Ptolemaic Egyptian culture and should be a major reference for the architecture.  Should there be some more Egyptian elements for the more rural buildings? Yes, but much of it should remain Hellenistic.  Also, although this issue has been mentioned before, little has been done to rectify the problems (Aside from the house work, which I greatly appreciate).  I would have to differ with you regarding the barracks.  Although there would be natives levied into the military, that would not warrant a totally Egyptian-looking structure; there could be some graffiti representing that culture and other distinctions, but it would be unlikely that a military run by Greeks would have their buildings built in much any other way.  Granted, I am only speaking from a historical perspective and not a gameplay one.  Probably it would be hard to distinguish between the two if there was a hardline effort to keep things strictly in a historically accurate depiction.  The concern to connect the Kushites with the Egyptians is definitely valid; I personally think that that would be possible by simply using a similar colour palette alongside some other subtleties.

[Sundiata]

@Thorfinn the Shallow Minded We definitely don't disagree, I just wanted to add the necessary nuance, so we don't do a 180 and end up with a historically inaccurate overly Greek Egypt either.

Some more nuancing  :

Spoiler

 

The Ptolemies initiated some major construction projects, but every one of the surviving monuments (that I'm aware of) are Egyptian in character. Also, the statues produced in this period were both purely Egyptian as well as purely Greek in style... 

With regard to the military, it has become apparent to me that most of the writing on the Ptolemaic military is based on some select Greek texts, which seem to downplay (or even ignore) the native components of the armed forces. In fact, except for Ptolemy II's campaign in Lower Nubia, southern Egypt barely seems to be mentioned in these texts. If you're wondering why, after Ptolemy II the Kushites made regular inroads in to Lower Nubia and Southern Egypt, and almost definitely contributed to the late Ptolemaic weakness, not something they would have been keen to share with the rest of the world. This means that their southern military activities, which would have made much more significant use of native troops, are barely mentioned, but were instrumental in keeping the Kushites from penetrating the Thebaid, or even pushing further north. I think the southern garrisons would have been overwhelmingly native, seen as the Greek presence there was very limited outside of the occasional southern campaigns. The southern aspect of Ptolemaic Egypt has become more relevant since the addition of the Kushites.

It would also be nice to update their unit roster (as for many other civs in-game) to include all of the important unit types (not just a selection). For example, they even made use of mercenaries from afar afield as Thrace! Not just Galatians... Although the cosmopolitan nature of Alexandria can hardly be denied, some would have it as only a bastion of Greek culture, where it was actually a bastion of Alexanders' dreams, a Hellenistic melting pot of the known world. By the 1st century AD (early Roman period), the Greek historian Dio Chrysostom describes Alexandria's resident foreign population including Greeks, Italians, Syrians, Libyans, Sicilians, Aethiopians, Bactrians, Scythians, Persians and Indians (in order of prevalence). It would be nice to represent this international nature through the addition of lower tier native levies (from native barracks) alongside Thracian, Syrian, Cretan as well as Kushite mercenaries, with the Hellenistic troops representing the top tier elite units. Of course there should also be some lower tier Hellenistic units, but my point is that Ptolemies should probably have one of the most diverse unit-rosters in the game (as should the Persians), and their architecture should also reflect this melting pot characteristic (and still keep it recognizable Egyptian at the same time).

Another note is that I think the current walls are actually very appropriate. Ptolemies would sometimes build Greek temples walled with Egyptian type walls like these. Ptolemy II also reoccupied and refurbished the famous Middle Kingdom fortresses in Lower Nubia, which would have looked purely Ancient Egyptian.

Long story short, yes, more Hellenistic influence in our building set, but not too much either, and the current "Egyptian" look isn't appropriate either, as most of it doesn't actually look Egyptian (it looks like a bad stereotype), so it would ideally need redesigning. I think @wowgetoffyourcellphone has a "colour corrected" texture pack for the Ptolemies that might prove useful. 

 

Basically, Ptolemies should have an Egyptian civilian substrate, with pronounced Hellenistic overtones in administration and military, with one of the most international selections of recruitable unit.

Edited May 25, 2018 by Sundiata

[LordGood]

The houses do not mix well, I do think administrative buildings could use an overhaul/variations.

Now that we have Kush in game we'll retain the Egyptian flavor if we fix the Ptolemaic set

[Lion.Kanzen]

8 minutes ago, LordGood said:

The houses do not mix well, I do think administrative buildings could use an overhaul/variations.

Now that we have Kush in game we'll retain the Egyptian flavor if we fix the Ptolemaic set

We can move  these building to  Aristeia.

[LordGood]

Why is this in game modification?

[Sundiata]

Oh, and the Ptolemaic wonder, the Edfu Temple is also perfect. Shouldn't be changed...

[Genava55]

source: https://www.anasynthesis.co.uk/index.php/articles/alexandria-50bce

Alexandria was a magnificent, multi-faceted, cosmopolitan walled city, built on the Egyptian coastline 178 kilometres (111 miles) from Cairo. Founded by and designed by Alexander the Great in 331 BCE, Alexandria soon developed into the premier city of the civilised world, largely due to its strategic location connecting the East with the West. With broad streets intersecting at 90 degrees, following a ‘grid pattern’, the city appears very modern to us today. Yet, the town-planning dividing between blocks of religious and civic character, the multi-cultural elements conjugating imported and indigenous traditions, the monumental architecture comprising cultural centres under the auspices of the Palace and the admirable throughout the centuries Library, as well as the pioneer works of engineering and navigation, rank it among the grandiose Hellenistic kingdoms.

Descriptions of Alexandria from the Ptolemaic period (as opposed to the Roman) are few and do not provide detailed description of architecture and buildings. The earliest description we have of the city is the account of the geographer Strabo, who visited the place in 26/20 BCE, that is, in the post-Ptolemaic period. With the city then being under Roman rule, Strabo may be also referring to buildings commissioned by Julius Caesar and Mark Anthony.



We do get a tantalising overview of the Hellenic grandeur of the city, as Strabo describes it in circa 26BCE. From the ancient geographer’s account we glean the following main points, excluding any references to Roman additions or modifications and taking into account what can be confirmed on archaeological evidence as existing in the Ptolemaic period, prior to Alexandria’s annexation to the Roman Empire.



The whole city is crossed by roads laid out with attention to symmetry and regularity, for the passage/circulation of horsemen and chariots. Two of these streets are very broad, exceeding a plethron in width (100ft), and they intersect at right angles. Town planning also provided for beautiful public grounds and royal residences, which occupy a fourth or even a third of its total extent. Above all, such a layout ensured easy access to every building, even those located further, and also to the harbour.

 The Museum forms part of the Palace and it includes a public promenade, a seating area and a large hall for the communal dining of the men of learning, the erudite ones. Also part of the palatial domain was the so-called Sema, an enclosure containing the tombs of the kings and supposedly that of Alexander, too.



Entering the great harbour, on the right hand is the island surmounted by the Pharos (Lighthouse); on the left we see rock reef and the promontory Lochias, with a palace built upon it. (The poet Lucan wrote about the palace interior in 39/65 AD, providing a detailed description and attributing it to Cleopatra. It is possible, however, that the palace in such an advantageous location may be associated with some previous sovereign). At the entrance, on the left hand are the inner compartments of the royal residence, extending and connected with those on the Lochias, and containing numerous apartments with painted decoration and groves.



Next after the Heptastadion is the harbour of Eunostos, and above this is the artificial port called Kibotos (the Ark) and equipped with docks. At the bottom of this harbour is a navigable canal, extending to the lake Mareotis. This link represents a pioneer and unparalleled for its time work of engineering, showing the significance of connectivity and communication for Alexandria and underlining its cosmopolitan character.

Flanking the canal is the Serapeion and other ancient sanctuaries. In short, the city of Alexandria abounds with sacred and profane edifices, next to important public works.