The upcoming DLC features the Khitan, Jurchen, and Western Xia, who were ethnic groups within the current territory of China. I think it’s necessary to change the term for the Chinese people at that time to Sion or Huaxia or a more appropriate term, as this would be more in line with the Chinese dynasties where the Han people were in the majority (Jin, Sui, Tang, Song, and Ming). It’s like changing India to Hindustan in the DLC The Dynasies of Indian
1 Like
Well, if they rename Chinese, than it should be Han I’d say. Civs are not named after dynasties, if peoples names exist.
Hindustanis were a difficult affair, because the rulers were Muslim invaders (already influenced by multiple cultures like Turks and Persians) while the population mostly was South-Asian and of Dharmic religions.
8 Likes
The most accurate name should be ‘Han’
3 Likes
I would still go with song, jin, khitan, because even the song dynasty wasn’t made up of just han people, neither was jin just jurchen
You want to name the Chinese and Jurchen civs “Song” and “Jin” but keep Khitans “Khitans”. Interesting.
Friendly reminder, the Liao Dynasty wasn’t made up of just Khitan people too.
Clearly the Mongol Empire wasn’t made up of just Mongol people. Prepare to rename the Mongols as well?
Actually, almost all large political entities in history were not made up of just one people.
5 Likes
Moreover, in the Vietnam Campaign, the army representing China was the Ming Dynasty. The Song Dynasty never attacked Vietnam in its history.
It would be different than the Indians. China was considerably more united than India was, so while the Indians had to be renamed as more Indian civs were added, the same isn’t necessary for the Chinese if some civs on the periphery (not Han Chinese) are added.
Historical China (under normal circumstances, not under a foreign dynasty such as the Yuan and Qing) has always been the Han core, and depending on the strength of the ruling dynasty extending more or less outward by subjugating neighbouring neighbours.
I can’t see any problems to name them Han, Tangut, Jurchen, Khitan.
Chinese is such a classical civ name in the game I can’t think about changing it for a second.
3 Likes
Please leave og civilization names alone.Chinese is a term we can all understand.
2 Likes
I can share some insights on what players in the Chinese AOE2 community think about the issue of “name change.”
Overall, this topic has sparked a great deal of discussion in China, with various opinions being voiced. However, the mainstream view is still to change “Chinese” to “Han.”
This is not only because it touches on our own history—making us more sensitive about it—but also due to concerns over cultural censorship.
As I mentioned in another topic, Chinese cultural censorship is not as sensitive as some people portray it. The Chinese government has always acknowledged the existence of various minority regimes throughout history. Therefore, as long as the game does not include depictions that contradict China’s historical perspective, it is perfectly acceptable to include civilizations such as Tibetan or Uyghur.
AOE2 is a niche game anyway, so even if some “troublemakers” were to file complaints, it likely wouldn’t cause a major stir. However, to be on the safe side, it’s best to avoid descriptions that might spark controversy.
For example, if “Chinese” is listed alongside minority groups such as the Jurchen, it might give the impression that the Jurchen do not belong to China. While this doesn’t necessarily mean that any issues will arise if that happens, it does add a little bit of uncertainty—albeit only a little.
But as long as “Chinese” is changed to “Han,” this risk and uncertainty can be minimized.
1 Like
Do you think Han is better than Huaxia? I Japanese feel Han as a ancient dynasity more than a ethnic group (That may be only about me).
I mean where’s the law that civs must consist of only one word?
Make it “Han Chinese”, “Tangut Chinese” etc, there - problem solved
There are 3 points to rename.
- Legitimacy
- China government’s reaction
- Beauty
1 Like
Khitan/Cathay and Jurchen co-existed with Song for hundreds of years. Song is also a reasonable name. All of them got conquered by Mongols.
Then it means the Burgundians don’t belong in France and the Sicilians don’t belong in Italy. We also already have the Mongols despite them being an official minority in China.
The reason why cultural censorship is notorious is that it is not about logic or evidence, but about the feelings of the executor or the impact of events.
In fact, once a ban is enforced, there will be no explanation or opportunity for debate.
Of course, I also said that I don’t think the possibility is very high, it’s just a bit uncertain.
I mean, why not rename them too?
It was a demonstration by absurd that keeping the name “Chinese” wouldn’t be a problem. No one would play the game and think “Sicily isn’t a rightful part of Italy because they are represented by another civ ingame”.
Also as the game is set in the Middle Ages, it’s much less sensitive than modern history (notably touching the sacred cow that is Mao Zedong…).
Similar to India, Chinese is a modern concept. When we say China, we mainly refer to the era from Republic of China and later.
Back to medieval era, the neareat concept of China is 中國(The Central Kingdom), and people from different countries on China land saw others as foreigners, that’s why I suggest change it to Han.
1 Like