Iberians Culture / Cultura Íberia

[Keinmy]

(TRADUCCIÓN EN CASTELLANO EN EL SIGUIENTE POST)
Hello! I love this game. I've been playing it for years! But I still do not understand why in the game the Iberian culture seems the culture of the beggars, apart from the historical-artistic inaccuracies that it has. I have to understand that there is a lack of knowledge about this culture and as a scholar in the subject that I am, I would like to offer you a realistic view of it.

In this first post, I want to talk a little about the cultures that were in the peninsula and take advantage to remark something that I find so disconcerting, as when Quentin Tarantino confuses Spanish culture with Mexican culture and puts the Mexicans singing flamenco in their films, and it is the language that has been put to the Iberians in the game: the vascon or euskera.

In the Iberian Peninsula we have several cultures that could be classified in the following macro-cultures:

• Celts, who occupied the northwest widely also occupying the interior, these Celts could be divided into 2:
  • The Celtic coast, more ¿fully? (Galaicos and Astures ...)
  • And the Celts of Interior with more particularities (Cantabrians, Vaceans, Celtics and Carpetans / Who could almost form their own group /)
• Lusitanians, who are also classified as Celts but have a markedly differentiated culture and also linked with the Vettones.
• Turdetanians / Tartesic, that occupy the south of the peninsula. There are many discussions to classify this culture since the area was a heap and meeting of cultures. Let's leave it there.
• Celtiberians, who occupied the interior of the peninsula, and as its etymology indicates Iberian and Celtic features.
• Iberians, who occupied the Mediterranean coast. Can be classified in two:
  • Iberian Levantine, located on the east coast and more linked with the Mediterranean Sea.
  • Iberian Betic, located in the southern region and more linked specifically with the "Sistema Bético" (Some mountains in the southeast).
• Basques, who occupied a small region on the Cantabrian coast to the north, being a "locked in itself" and isolated town.

Curiously at present, the regions occupied by these peoples correspond (more or less) with regions, which have characteristics of ethnography and folklore, and even of language and accent.

• Celts: Coast: Galicia, Asturias. || Interior: Cantabria, Castilla y León, Castilla la Mancha.
• Lusitanians: Portugal || Vettones: Extremadura.
• Turdetanians / Tartesic: Western Andalusia.
• Celtiberians: Aragón (Fully addition)
• Iberians: Levantines: Catalonia and Valencia. || Betics: Murcia and Eastern Andalusia.
• Basques: Basque Country, La Rioja and Navarra. (The latter more gently)

The Iberians spoke Iberian and it is true that we do not have a clear dictionary of this language but with a glance to understand that the Iberian culture has little to do with the Basque culture. In fact, in the area occupied by the ancient Basques, Euskera is still spoken, a language that has absolutely nothing to do with Romance languages related to Latin, in fact studies suggest that it is related to the Aquitano spoken in the south of France and the Pyrenees; While in the area that formerly occupied the Iberian people, and that is why I have highlighted the text, a language is spoken, plus a dialect of it, called Catalan. Which makes it more likely by logic, that the Catalan is more linked to the Iberian than the Basque, and therefore the Catalan should be the language they must have in the game. (See a political map of Spain and check it)

 

Edited July 12, 2018 by Keinmy
Traslation

[Keinmy]

(TRADUCCIÓN EN CASTELLANO)

¡Hola! Me encanta este juego ¡Llevo jugándolo años! Pero sigo sin comprender por qué en el juego la cultura íbera parece la cultura de los pordioseros, a parte de las inexactitudes histórico-artísticas que posee. He de entender que hay un grabe desconocimiento sobre esta cultura y como estudioso en la materia que soy quisiera ofreceros una visión realista sobre ella.

En este primer post, quiero hablar un poco de las culturas que había en la península y aprovechar para hacer hincapié en algo que me parece tan desconcertante, como cuando Quentin Tarantino confunde la cultura española con la mexicana y pone a los mejicanos cantando flamenco en sus películas, y es el idioma que se le ha puesto a los íberos en el juego: el vascón o euskera.

En la península Iberica (Que no Íbera) tenemos varias culturas  que podrían clasificarse en las siguientes macro-culturas:

• Celtas, que ocuparon el noroeste ampliamente ocupando tambien el interior, estos celtas se podrían dividir en 2:
  • -Los celtas de costa, más plenos (Galaicos y Astures...)
  • y los Celtas de Interior con más particularidades (Cántabros, Vaceos, Célticos y Carpetanos /Que casi podrían formar un grupo propio/)
• Lusitanos, que también se clasifican como celtas pero poseen una cultura marcadamente diferenciada y vinculada también con los Vettones.
• Turdetanos/Tartésicos, que ocupan el sur de la península. Hay muchas discusiones para clasificar esta cultura puesto que la zona fue un cúmulo y reunión de culturas. Dejémoslo ahí.
• Celtíberos, que ocuparon el interior de la península, y como indica su etimología poseen rasgos iberos y celtas.
• Íberos, que ocuparon la costa mediterranea. Y que pueden clasificarse en dos:
  • Iberos levantinos,  localizados en la costa este y vinculados más al mar mediterráneo.
  • Iberos beticos, localizados en la región sur y vinculados más interior concretamente al sistema bético.
• Vascones, que ocuparon una pequeña región en la costa cantábrica al norte, siendo un pueblo cerrado y aislado.

Curiosamente en la actualidad las regiones ocupadas por estos pueblos se corresponden (más o menos) con regiones, las cuales poseen características de etnografía y folclore, e incluso de lenguaje y acento.

• Celtas: Costa: Galicia, Asturias. || Interior: Cantabria, Castilla y León, Castilla la Mancha.
• Lusitanos: Portugal || Vettones: Extremadura.
• Turdetanos/Tartésicos: Andalucía Occidental.
• Celtíberos: Aragón (Plenamente además)
• Íberos: Levantinos: Cataluña y Valencia. || Béticos: Murcia y Andalucía Oriental.
• Vascones: País Vasco, La Rioja y Navarra. (Estos últimos más suavemente)

Los íberos hablaban íbero y es cierto que no tenemos un diccionario claro de este idioma pero vasta un vistazo para comprender que la cultura ibera poco tiene que ver con la vascona. De hecho en la zona que ocupan los antiguos vascones se sigue hablando Euskera, un idioma que no tiene absolutamente nada que ver con las lenguas romances emparentadas con el latin, de hecho los estudios apuntan a que está emparentado con el aquitano hablado en el sur de francia y pirineos; Mientras que en la zona que antiguamente ocupaba el pueblo íberio, y por eso he resaltado el texto, se habla un idioma, más un dialecto del mismo, llamado Catalán. Lo cual hace más probable por lógica, que el Catalán esté más vinculado con el Íbero que el Euskera, y por consiguiente el Catalán debería ser el idioma que han de tener en el juego.

Edited July 12, 2018 by Keinmy

[Keinmy]

In the second post, I will emphasize the cities, I will write later.  // En el segundo post, haré hincapié en las ciudades, lo escribiré más adelante.

[Lion.Kanzen]

Seria bueno llenar ciertos huecos que deja cada facción. 3 héroes por facción como mínimo. una maravilla (cada uno). unidades elites...

[Lion.Kanzen]

Nuestras facciones  siempre tienen que estar completamente documentadas siguiendo casi este esquema. lo que nos estas dando es un 10% de la facción.

https://trac.wildfiregames.com/wiki/Civ%3A_Iberians

[Genava55]

11 hours ago, Keinmy said:

Which makes it more likely by logic, that the Catalan is more linked to the Iberian than the Basque, and therefore the Catalan should be the language they must have in the game.

Actually, it doesn't make any sense either. Catalan is mostly from latin origins (Occitan languages). Iberian language is for the moment unclassified and there is still debate to know if it is a indo-european language or not. There is a hypothesis relating the iberian language to the basque:

https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vascoiberismo

But for the moment, nothing is conclusive.

 

 

[Sundiata]

I think the first thing to note, is that the term "Iberian" also has a wider meaning, referring to all the populations of the Iberian peninsula, since ancient ancient times (because Romans and Greeks first encountered ethnic Iberians in Eastern Spain, they applied that name to the entire peninsula as well). Of course this isn't the most precise terminology, but much of pre-Roman Iberian history is somewhat obscure, and at the time that this faction was designed, not enough information on any one ancient population of the Iberian peninsula was available to create a complete faction, so the "Iberian" faction became a sort of amalgamation of different tribes and cultures of the Iberian Peninsula of that time (not that different from the way the Gauls and Britons were designed). More specific quality information on Iberian material culture, art, architecture and military will always be received with open arms!

but,

11 hours ago, Keinmy said:

Catalan is more linked to the Iberian than the Basque, and therefore the Catalan should be the language they must have in the game.

Has me a little worried... Catalan is not generally considered more linked to Ancient Iberian than Basque. How would a medieval romance language be more suitable than an ancient pre-Roman, possibly even pre-Indo-European language? Since ancient Iberian is extinct and nobody speaks or even understands it, the choice for "the vascon or euskera" language seems far more appropriate, because it's the most ancient, and in all probability more closely related to ancient Iberian than any other language known and understood today. 

[Genava55]

16 minutes ago, Sundiata said:

More specific quality information on Iberian material culture, art, architecture and military will always be received with open arms!

I cannot help a lot, I don't read Spanish easily and I don't have the books of Quesada Sanz, but here a document he wrote:

https://www.uam.es/proyectosinv/equus/warmas/online/Guerra Iberia Quesada.pdf

 

Edited July 13, 2018 by Genava55

[Keinmy]

13 hours ago, Genava55 said:

Actually, it doesn't make any sense either. Catalan is mostly from latin origins (Occitan languages). Iberian language is for the moment unclassified and there is still debate to know if it is a indo-european language or not. There is a hypothesis relating the iberian language to the basque:

https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vascoiberismo

But for the moment, nothing is conclusive.

 

 

I correct, it makes sense. If you compare a map where Catalan and Valencian (Dialect of Catalan) are spoken with a map of the Levantine Iberian regions, you will see that it corresponds to the zones (And same happens with the Basque area and the current Euskera). 

12 hours ago, Sundiata said:

I think the first thing to note, is that the term "Iberian" also has a wider meaning, referring to all the populations of the Iberian peninsula, since ancient ancient times (because Romans and Greeks first encountered ethnic Iberians in Eastern Spain, they applied that name to the entire peninsula as well). Of course this isn't the most precise terminology, but much of pre-Roman Iberian history is somewhat obscure, and at the time that this faction was designed, not enough information on any one ancient population of the Iberian peninsula was available to create a complete faction, so the "Iberian" faction became a sort of amalgamation of different tribes and cultures of the Iberian Peninsula of that time (not that different from the way the Gauls and Britons were designed). More specific quality information on Iberian material culture, art, architecture and military will always be received with open arms!

but,

Has me a little worried... Catalan is not generally considered more linked to Ancient Iberian than Basque. How would a medieval romance language be more suitable than an ancient pre-Roman, possibly even pre-Indo-European language? Since ancient Iberian is extinct and nobody speaks or even understands it, the choice for "the vascon or euskera" language seems far more appropriate, because it's the most ancient, and in all probability more closely related to ancient Iberian than any other language known and understood today. 

I understand you. But the differences that exist between tribes  (Iberos, Vascones, Celtas ...) are very marked, mainly because of the climates. Believe that today a Galician and an Andalusian are very different, even in the character. Think at that time! It is like saying that Hellenes and Romans were equal for having architecture, clothes and similar gods. 

Caution! Catalan is not the Iberian language, just as Euskera is not either. But it makes more sense for Catalan to speak Basque, for the justification I have given that they share exactly the same areas.

In fact, Euskera is a language created in the 19th century as a unitary language for all populations of the Basque culture. That is, the Iberians of the game speak a language of a century ago. That is why the Spanish are so shocked by this decision XD. 

I promise that if I find a serious dictionary of Iberian terms (Currently there is much new age romanticism with the theme that destroys more than fix ¬ ¬) I will go up the terms.

PD: There is a very old language, which is not regulated but if registered, and which is probably more related to the ancient Iberian, is Aranés. It is a language that is only spoken in an area of the Pyrenees. Is that it would be very interesting in truth. I'll upload a sample when I can.

 

12 hours ago, Genava55 said:

I cannot help a lot, I don't read Spanish easily and I don't have the books of Quesada Sanz, but here a document he wrote:

https://www.uam.es/proyectosinv/equus/warmas/online/Guerra Iberia Quesada.pdf

 

Don't worry, Im spanish XD. If you need to find information about the text and I'm looking for it ;). 
My main source of information for ibera culture, among others, is the scientific magazine of archeology "despertar ferro", mainly because it has updated information on the subject. https://www.despertaferro-ediciones.com 
If you like military history look at it, you will surely like it. I like more the artistic and anthropological part. jeje

[GunChleoc]

The Basque language is a lot older than the 19th century... so maybe the 19th century is when some form of standardization happened, which is not uncommon for European languages. So, that the modern language has been standardized is not a valid argument - so has Catalan, and this argument would equally disqualify it as a choice.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basque_language#History_and_classification

Of course, the language to be used would have to be a historical version of Basque, rather than the modern one. The same would go for Catalan - which would then have to be something very close to Latin... prior to be taken over by the Romans, people would not have spoken a Latin dialect at all.

[Keinmy]

23 hours ago, Lion.Kanzen said:

Seria bueno llenar ciertos huecos que deja cada facción. 3 héroes por facción como mínimo. una maravilla (cada uno). unidades elites...

 

22 hours ago, Lion.Kanzen said:

Nuestras facciones  siempre tienen que estar completamente documentadas siguiendo casi este esquema. lo que nos estas dando es un 10% de la facción.

https://trac.wildfiregames.com/wiki/Civ%3A_Iberians

I want to treat this entry as a small illustrated atlas of the Iberian culture. But I attend to your requests.

Famous Iberians: I would choose Hilmice, Indibil, Orison.
-Hilmice, was a princess Iberian, she married with Hannibal Barca. She was a peacemaker. It could be a kind of Hero Priest, with ability to provoke peace (as it happens at the beginning of the gameplay), advantages over temples or some type of Carthaginian militia.
-Alucio, was a prince celtiberian (Is not iberian but...) The payment to Escipion with a huge treasure, for the rescue of his lover. And I also give an army of 1400 horsemen at the disposal of the Carthaginians. The advantages are evident: creation of riders, abundance of metals ...
-Abelox, was a warrior iberian. He was a negotiator with Romans and Carthaginians. ¿Advantages over diplomacy, ease in being allies?-Besadino, he was a senior military officer. He was taken prisoner by  Roman.
-Bilistages, he was a leader iberian ally of Rome. He had asked for a reinforcement of 3000 men to hold the siege. ¿Advantage of continued appearance of militia for a time?
-Budar, he was a warrior iberian, he lost was defeated by the Roman praetor Quinto Minucio Termo.
-Culcas, he was a leader of iberians, he rose up in arms against the Roman Republic, leading the forces of 17 cities.
-Indibil, he was a leader of iberians. He had quarrels with Rome and Carthage. He wanted the independence of both. Him history is very long, but basically he fight very strong  against the invasion of Rome.
-Orison,  he was a leader. Successor of Istolacio e Indortes, they were defeated by the Carthaginian Amilcar Barca, whose elephants caused terror among the Iberian troops. He being more cunning, he used a herd of brave bulls, with fire on the antlers, to scare the elephants and also burn the enemy camp. Advantage: brave bull unit (it scare horse, elephants and war animals) and provocate burns in building. He got the first defeat to the Carthaginian army.

To my knowledge there is no known "wonder" belonging to the Iberians (A buildings I refer to as a palace, because the statue of Lady of Elche itself is a jewel) in the sense of something that has been well preserved. I have to say that finding Cancho Roano as marvel ibera in the gameplay caused me a smile (Cancho Roano belongs to the Tartessic culture).
 

But if I had to put an Iberian wonder, in the game, I would like to put a generic sanctuary (a complex of religious buildings similar to the acropolis of Athens). There are many cases, and apparently the splendor of the cities more than making palaces for men, they did for the gods. When I write about the architecture of Iberians, I will give some examples. For the moment I leave these sketches about the Iberian sanctuary " de la Luz" in Murcia.

[Trinketos]

On 7/12/2018 at 5:01 PM, Keinmy said:

mejicanos

DENUCIADO

[Keinmy]

48 minutes ago, GunChleoc said:

The Basque language is a lot older than the 19th century... so maybe the 19th century is when some form of standardization happened, which is not uncommon for European languages. So, that the modern language has been standardized is not a valid argument - so has Catalan, and this argument would equally disqualify it as a choice.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basque_language#History_and_classification

Of course, the language to be used would have to be a historical version of Basque, rather than the modern one. The same would go for Catalan - which would then have to be something very close to Latin... prior to be taken over by the Romans, people would not have spoken a Latin dialect at all.

Please, I will not discuss this further.

I am Spanish, I know what I speak, study culture, study my culture. I learned the history of Euskera in school and in culture debates, not in wikipedia.  If you think that the Bascones and the Iberians are the same, then be happy. But it is not true. 

In 1918 the legislation of orthography of Euskera was not created. It was created a new neutral language taking aspects and parts of all the languages that exist in the Basque region. In fact, the authentic Basque language, which is spoken in the villages, has nothing to do with the new Euskera. That's why it was created, because they could not debate and organize among themselves.

[Lion.Kanzen]

3 minutes ago, Trinketos said:

DENUCIADO

Spanish Castilian don't get that kind of jokes.

[Keinmy]

1 minute ago, Lion.Kanzen said:

Spanish Castilian don't get that kind of jokes.

 

 

 

 

 

59/5000

 

I do not understand what is happening. I do not know what joke it is. O_O

 

[Lion.Kanzen]

Quote

I am Spanish, I know what I speak, study culture, study my culture. I learned the history of Euskera in school and in culture debates, not in wikipedia.  If you think that the Bascones and the Iberians are the same, then be happy. But it is not true. 

Isn't good way to say things here. 

Here the things works with sources, that's how we created the Kushites. 

[Lion.Kanzen]

Just now, Keinmy said:

 

 

 

 

 

59/5000

 

I do not understand what is happening. I do not know what joke it is. O_O

 

No lo entenderías, bromas y memes del otro lado del Atlántico.

[Keinmy]

3 minutes ago, Lion.Kanzen said:

No lo entenderías, bromas y memes del otro lado del Atlántico.

 

5 minutes ago, Lion.Kanzen said:

Isn't good way to say things here. 

Here the things works with sources, that's how we created the Kushites. 

Mira, yo no estoy aqui para bromas, ni para perder el tiempo. Yo estoy aquí en plan serio.

Justificaciones de por que el vascoiberismo no es algo 100% aceptado te pongo las fuentes:

La lengua ibérica es considerada habitualmente una lengua aislada. No obstante, tras constatar las diversas afinidades existentes con la lengua vasca y la aquitana, muchos investigadores han propuesto que tales afinidades se justificarían por algún tipo de parentesco, siendo conocida esta teoría como vascoiberismo. Pero también hay muchos otros investigadores que creen que esas afinidades no provienen necesariamente de una relación de parentesco, puesto que las afinidades fonológicas podrían ser debidas a fenómenos de área lingüística entre lenguas que comparten un mismo territorio, mientras que las afinidades de léxico y onomásticas podrían ser debidas al préstamo lingüístico.
https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idioma_íbero

Y te pongo además el blog de Enrique Cabrejas que es el filolofo del que he hablado
http://estudiosibericos.blogspot.com/2014/06/la-sfic-respalda-la-tesis-de-enric.html
http://enriquecabrejas.blogspot.com

[Lion.Kanzen]

When we started the game, or the original founders we have mixing cultures, like Hellenes in a single faction, Celts in others and this way around years. (2003).

So one still outdated were the Iberians. without man power is very difficult make more faction. we update animation, and cavalry last alpha, I ask to revisit Iberian(of course after update my fav Romans.) is hard specially if we have many ideas or different opinions. we can split the more obvious , its not the first time.

[Lion.Kanzen]

Quote

Mira, yo no estoy aqui para bromas, ni para perder el tiempo. Yo estoy aquí en plan serio.
 

Dude, me neither. so you don't need be rude.

[Genava55]

6 hours ago, Keinmy said:

I correct, it makes sense. If you compare a map where Catalan and Valencian (Dialect of Catalan) are spoken with a map of the Levantine Iberian regions, you will see that it corresponds to the zones (And same happens with the Basque area and the current Euskera). 

I don't understand how it could be more rigoreous. It is like using old French for gallic populations and Italian for the Romans. There is no reason to think there is a continuity between the Iberian language and the Catalan. Using the Basque language is not perfect but it is still a valid hypothesis contrary to the use of Catalan. 

Edited July 14, 2018 by Genava55

[Genava55]

5 hours ago, Keinmy said:

That's why it was created, because they could not debate and organize among themselves.

Are you really neutral on this subject? I'm tired of peoples using ancient history to satisfy their political agenda. For me it looks like you have a grief against the Basques. 

[av93]

22 hours ago, Genava55 said:

I cannot help a lot, I don't read Spanish easily and I don't have the books of Quesada Sanz, but here a document he wrote:

https://www.uam.es/proyectosinv/equus/warmas/online/Guerra Iberia Quesada.pdf

 

My highlights of the text:

- Little evidence of bows and slings: found arrows are for aristocratic hunting. But probably used by low class infantry.
- Scuta used only in north-east of Hispania

·Warfare model

- The first were one made of individual heroic aristocratic soldiers, followed by companions and low classes. (Spears and some armour).

- Later was displaced by a standardization of the equipment suggesting a close line formations, but not in a Roman or Greek degree.

- The warfare changes when Hispania became a Roman-Carthaginian war field and the use of the natives by both armies: introduction of bronze helmets (Monterfortino), Oval shields by Punic influence (not by gaul), lighter spears, more javelins and  the development of the Iberian cavalry (before he riders dismounted to fight at land). Iberians never used spear cavalry and boecian helmets (although they were depicted like this on coins). They used military standards (flags). The author also say that Iberians used mostly a warfare of heavy infantry, light infantry as support and cavalry, saying that it was more similar to the Roman that the traditional stereotype of hit and run and guerrilla warfare: for example Carthaginians allowed native troops to fight in their native way with their original equipment, and there are accounts of Iberians holding the line as heavy infantry., against heavy Roman infantry. The author says that the Iberian revolts against Romans failed because the leadership and organization, not because lack or inferior equipment or tactics.

- Finally, the Iberians were absorbed by Romans, and the native equipment disappears, including the falcata. Caetrati  (javelins and round shield) would made by a Roman demand, because their army already have heavy infantry.

·Warfare aim

- Never was the destruction or the enslavement of the population, but sacking and later the subjugation of other cities. Honour was individual, and not for the state. There was the devotio, soldier bounding to other noble, to the death. 

· Defensive structures:

Were more deterrents than for defending from formal sieges, and outpost existed. 

 

About culture and language

There are some cultural essentialism here. And in to some extension, there's some need it, because this is a game and there's a need of a generalization, for depicting the civilization but also for gameplay. But:

 

On 7/13/2018 at 12:29 AM, Keinmy said:

Curiously at present, the regions occupied by these peoples correspond (more or less) with regions, which have characteristics of ethnography and folklore, and even of language and accent.

 

8 hours ago, Keinmy said:

I understand you. But the differences that exist between tribes  (Iberos, Vascones, Celtas ...) are very marked, mainly because of the climates. Believe that today a Galician and an Andalusian are very different, even in the character. Think at that time! It is like saying that Hellenes and Romans were equal for having architecture, clothes and similar gods. 

 

But trying to establish a vague continuum between the differences in Hispania in the past and the present in a so long time (in part argued because climate) isn't very solid. I said that as a grandson of Andalusian and Galician people, with Catalonian fathers. Team have stated before that Euskera isn't correct. You may be right, as far as I know, that the current Euskera is a standardization with a lot of invention (what language isn't?): but using a Latin idiom like Catalan is worse: maybe it could be tried to replace the modern Euskera words for old ones, or use Celtic in absence of Iberian words or language. An option has to be chosen, and it's clear that both are wrong, but trying a non-latin language seems the best option.

BTW, I'm a defender of the option of showing only the names of the structures and units in the user language, not in the native one, there's a patch somewhere. But there will be the problem of when the units get audio for orders.

 

About gameplay

As other said, the problem with the "barbarian" civs are that we have their depictions by their enemies, and weren't centralised states with a more homogeneous culture, social structure and warfare. But I support your idea that a better depiction could be made, relegating this Iberians for the east Mediterranean coast, and adding some more Hispanic civilization.

The problem is that the team made an agreement of not add more civilizations (although broke by Kushites), and there're a some interesting civilizations that could be added before, because gameplay (Scythians), cultural diversity or geographical diversity (African and Asian civilizations). If we made a little concession to cultural essentialism, and knowing that every single tribe can't be added, we could make a division of:  Iberians, celtiberians and lusitianians.

If there are good enough materials and references, my suggestion would be make Lusitanians,  for the "iberian" (better Hispanic) skirmisher civilization. Celtiberians could be campaign only.

 

 

 

Edited July 14, 2018 by av93

[Sundiata]

11 hours ago, Keinmy said:

I understand you. But the differences that exist between tribes  (Iberos, Vascones, Celtas ...) are very marked, mainly because of the climates. Believe that today a Galician and an Andalusian are very different, even in the character. Think at that time! It is like saying that Hellenes and Romans were equal for having architecture, clothes and similar gods. 

Caution! Catalan is not the Iberian language, just as Euskera is not either. But it makes more sense for Catalan to speak Basque, for the justification I have given that they share exactly the same areas.

In fact, Euskera is a language created in the 19th century as a unitary language for all populations of the Basque culture. That is, the Iberians of the game speak a language of a century ago. That is why the Spanish are so shocked by this decision XD. 

It's not like saying "Hellenes and Romans were equal", it's more like using Samnite and Etruscan references to fill the gaps in the Roman faction if we didn't have enough primary references to work with. In the case of the Romans, we don't need to do that because there is a ton of high quality information and primary references available on them. There is not nearly as much information available on the Iberians (just a fraction, actually)... Hence the need to the get a bit creative. Of course, the faction can and should continually improve over time, but replacing Euskera with Catalan is not an improvement, at all... Looking for the most archaic forms of Basque words, and mixing in the few Iberian words we can find would be much more of an improvement. The fact that Catalan speakers today occupy ancient Iberian areas is a very poor justification for using the Catalan language to represent the Pre-Roman peoples that lived there 2000+ years ago...  There is an actual (even if it's a faint) relationship between the Aquitanian (and by extension Basque) and Iberian languages. There is none with the Catalan language...

 

5 hours ago, Genava55 said:

It is like using old French for gallic populations and Italian for the Romans. There is no reason to think there is a continuity between the Iberian language and the Catalan. Using the Basque language is not perfect but it is still a valid hypothesis contrary to the use of Catalan. 

Exactly! Or English for the Britons, or Arabic for the Kushites, Ptolemies, Seleucids and Carthaginians...

 

10 hours ago, Keinmy said:

For the moment I leave these sketches about the Iberian sanctuary " de la Luz" in Murcia.

That's actually a useful reference. 

 

And a different sanctuary:

They look more like temples than wonders though...

 

By the way, technically I wouldn't have a real problem with "Iberianizing" the Iberians, BUT, that would mean cutting out Celt-Iberian stuff (say goodby to the references from Numantia), Lusitanian stuff like Viriathus, the Tartessian elements like the Cancho Roano, as well as the temple, which would need to be replaced with a Mediterranean type temple (even more Greek looking stuff...) It would end up reducing a beautifully unique faction representative of the entire Iberian peninsula, to a much more limited, even generic looking faction. If we add your unpopular language suggestion we'd basically end up with a Catalan nationalist faction. 21st century politics is not really what 0AD is about. 

According to this logic, we'd also have to split the Gauls into their respective tribes as well as the Britons, and for the sake of representation, Celt-Iberians, Lusitanians and Tartessians would also need to be independently developed. It would be more accurate, yes, but not feasible in terms of references and man-power. You'd end up with like 10 half-done factions, because there isn't enough reference material to create complete and historically accurate factions, which would be the (self-defeating) point, wouldn't it?    

 

Edited July 14, 2018 by Sundiata

[Genava55]

2 hours ago, av93 said:

The problem is that the team made an agreement of not add more civilizations (although broke by Kushites), and there're a some interesting civilizations that could be added before, because gameplay (Scythians), cultural diversity or geographical diversity (African and Asian civilizations). If we made a little concession to cultural essentialism, and knowing that every single tribe can't be added, we could make a division of:  Iberians, celtiberians and lusitianians.

Personally, I would prefer if there is more regional culture included in each factions 0 A.D. currently have. For example, Iberians could permit different choices for the player: more Mediterranean standardized iberian infantry  or more traditional tribal warfare with inclusion of Celtiberian and Lusitanian warriors. I am more in favor of deeper strategies and tactics than in a bunch of superficial factions with all the same game mechanics. More qualitative than quantitative.

3 hours ago, av93 said:

The warfare changes when Hispania became a Roman-Carthaginian war field and the use of the natives by both armies: introduction of bronze helmets (Monterfortino), Oval shields by Punic influence (not by gaul)

He used often this argument, and this is mostly true. Carthage was the reason for this evolution in the equipment. The only thing, he is forgetting the close influence between iberian and gallic mercenaries for Sicilians, Punics and Greek cities, because the oval shield must comes from somewhere for the Carthaginians too:

Justinus: Epitome of Pompeius Trogus' Philippic Histories, book 20, 1: Dionysius the tyrant, who, we have said, had transported an army from Sicily into Italy, and made war upon the Greeks there, proceeded, after taking Locri by storm, to attack the Crotonians, who, in consequence of their losses in the former war, were scarcely recovering their strength in a long peace. 2 With their small force, however, they resisted the great army of Dionysius more valiantly than they had before, with so many thousands, resisted the smaller number of the Locrians. 3 So much spirit has weakness in withstanding insolent power; and so much more sure, at times, is an unexpected than an expected victory. 4 But as Dionysius was prosecuting the war, ambassadors from the Gauls, who had burned Rome some months before, came to him to desire an alliance and friendship with him; 5 observing that "their country lay in the midst of his enemies, and could be of great service to him, either by supporting him in the field, or by annoying his enemies in the rear when they were engaged with him." 6 The embassy was well received by Dionysius, who, having made an alliance with them, and being reinforced with assistance from Gaul, renewed the war as it were afresh.

7 The causes of the Gauls' coming into Italy, in quest of new settlements, were civil discords and perpetual contentions at home; 8 and when, from impatience of those feuds, they had sought refuge in Italy, they expelled the Etruscans from their country, and founded Mediolanum, Comum, Brixia, Verona, Bergamum, Tridentum, and Vicentia. 9 The Etruscans, too, when they were driven from their old settlements, betook themselves, under a captain named Rhaetus, towards the Alps, where they founded the nation of Rhaetia, so named from their leader.

10 An invasion of Sicily by the Carthaginians obliged Dionysius to return thither; for that people, having rebuilt their army, had resumed the war, which they had broken off in consequence of the plague, with increased spirit. 11 The leader in the expedition was Hanno the Carthaginian, 12 whose enemy Juniatus, the most powerful of the Carthaginians at that time, having, from hatred to him, given friendly notice to Dionysius, in a letter written in Greek, of the approach of the army and the inactivity of its leader, was found, through the letter being intercepted, guilty of treason; 13 and a decree of the senate was made, "that no Carthaginian should thenceforward study the Greek literature or language, so that no one might be able to speak with the enemy, or write to him, without an interpreter." 14 Not long after, Dionysius, whom a little before neither Sicily nor Italy could hold, being reduced and weakened by continual wars, was at last killed by a conspiracy among his own subjects.

Diodorus Siculus Library of History, Book 15, 70: 1 From Sicily, Celts and Iberians to the number of two thousand sailed to Corinth, for they had been sent by the tyrant Dionysius to fight in an alliance with the Lacedaemonians, and had received pay for five months. The Greeks, in order to make trial of them, led them forth; and they proved their worth in hand-to‑hand fighting and in battles and many both of the Boeotians and of their allies were slain by them.  Accordingly, having won repute for superior dexterity and courage and rendered many kinds of service, they were given awards by the Lacedaemonians and sent back home at the close of the summer to Sicily.

Diodorus Siculus Library of History, Book 16, 73: 3 The Carthaginians recognized that their generals in Sicily were conducting the war in a spiritless manner and decided to send out new ones, together with heavy reinforcements.Straightway they made a levy for the campaign from among their noblest citizens and made suitable drafts among the Libyans. Furthermore, appropriating a large sum of money, they enlisted mercenaries from among the Iberians, Celts, and Ligurians.They were occupied also with the construction of battleships. They assembled many freighters and manufactured other supplies in enormous quantities.

Diodorus Siculus Library of History, Book 20, 11: 1 After Agathocles had viewed the array of the barbarians, he entrusted the right wing to his son Archagathus, giving him twenty-five hundred foot-soldiers; and he drew up the Syracusans, who were thirty-five hundred in number, then three thousand Greek mercenaries, and finally three thousand Samnites, Etruscans, and Celts.

3 hours ago, av93 said:

BTW, I'm a defender of the option of showing only the names of the structures and units in the user language, not in the native one, there's a patch somewhere. But there will be the problem of when the units get audio for orders.

The problem with this is the different treatment we made for barbarians factions and greco-romans factions. We accept the use of "hastati", "triari", "hoplite", but not the others, only because we are unfamiliar and because it is difficult.