Yes, I agree, although it seems that the devs want AoM to reach the Late Middle Ages (1250-1500) (In case they later decide to bring the Slavs/Rus in Eastern Europe and in West Africa the Yoruba/Ife into the game)…
Yes I agree…
minor note but normans are not! vikings, they are a synthesized population of mostly franks and some settled norse
1 Like
I mean if we are going by a strict technical definition viking is just the occupation of sea-based raiders. Which the Normans, both on a personal and institutional level, engaged in and frequently allied with the Danes for this purpose. So there were definitely vikings from that perspective. Using a more colloquial definition viking is used for populations that were either Norse or had significant Norse influence during the Viking Age which the Normans fit.
1 Like
Yeah exactly. Furthermore, let’s not forget the civ is named “norse”, not vikings. that means that the chronology of the in-game civ can extend before and after the viking age.
Of course, the Normans were Nordic settlers who settled in northern France and Sicily… in fact on the maps of Charlemagne and Robert in VaV, the Normans appear like the Silicians or the Vikings…
Yes, some Norse people continued to survive on the islands of Scotland until the 14th-15th century…
don’t be so sure! the lectures i had from a university department of viking and medieval nordic studies made it painfully clear that scholarship is completely guessing with the actual meaning of “viking” in its language. at best we are confident it loosely describes people involved in various marine-based activities. the whole “viking was a job” thing that’s everywhere on the internet is total conjecture. that being said, it’s quite fine to call the norse settlers at the mouth of the seine in the 9th century vikings, but the normans are a unique people who drew not only genetically but culturally and linguistically more from the local frankish population of normandy than norse, so calling normans vikings is really just goofy history. they were a frankish people with reasonably notable chunk of norse (and breton) influence in the noble families
“Using a more colloquial definition viking is used for populations that were either Norse or had significant Norse influence during the Viking Age which the Normans fit.” if that is indeed a colloquial definition somewhere (i’ve never heard it) then it is a very, very, very bad one
1 Like
You seem to be confusing the etymology of a word for it’s descriptive definition. We are unsure where the word comes from not how it was used in sources and what groups of people it described. It is used to describe seabased raiders in the overwhelming majority of cases and eventually expands to become a term to mean something closer to “people who got out by sea”. Viking being a job is not conjecture it is the overwhelming academic consensus on the term. This definition is used by, but is not limited too, scholars such as Neil Price, Jóhanna Katrín Friðriksdóttir, Howard Williams, Jackson Crawford, Judith Jesch, John Sexton, Andrew Pfrenger, Mattias Nordvig, Anders Winroth and many many more. If you don’t believe me feel free to engage with their works and see how they use it and specifically how they note contemporary Norse populations use of it versus modern discussion.
It does not matter whether the Normans were entirely Frankish, entirely Norse, Mostly Frankish, Mostly Norse or an exact even mix of the two. Viking does not reference culture or ethnicity outside of colloquial usage. The Norse sources make reference to Frisian, Estonian, and Finnish vikings. From a contemporary Norse perspective if a group of Normans get on boats and commit piracy then they are vikings.
“if that is indeed a colloquial definition somewhere (i’ve never heard it) then it is a very, very, very bad one.”
It doesn’t really matter if you think it’s good or not. Lay people use the term viking as a short hand for ethnicity and cultural in reference to North Germanic people from the Viking Age. It’s a common usage of the word in modern discussions of vikings but not one based in the historical usage of the term.
i am specifically telling you the exonym you are working with is separate from the term in old norse, which you seem to acknowledge now, which is good.
“Viking being a job is not conjecture it is the overwhelming academic consensus on the term. This definition is used by, but is not limited too, scholars such as Neil Price, Jóhanna Katrín Friðriksdóttir, Howard Williams, Jackson Crawford, Judith Jesch, John Sexton, Andrew Pfrenger, Mattias Nordvig, Anders Winroth and many many more. If you don’t believe me feel free to engage with their works and see how they use it and specifically how they note contemporary Norse populations use of it versus modern discussion.”
let’s see some actual excerpts of the scholarship that say vikings were any people who had norse influence.
“Lay people use the term viking as a short hand for ethnicity and cultural in reference to North Germanic people from the Viking Age. It’s a common usage of the word in modern discussions of vikings but not one based in the historical usage of the term.”
in fact i remember some clowns saying they were viking because their great grandparents were immigrants from norway. if you think that’s valid, i’m just jealous of your imagination. unfortunately given the declension in your username i’m guessing you have a bit of a personal investment in all things viking
I’m not saying that the academics are arguing that it’s anyone with Norse influence. The academics argue that is a term that means “pirate”, “sea-raider” and more rarely “sea-voyager”. They root it in the historical context of Norse literature where it simply describes any sea-borne attacker. Ethnicity and culture is completely irrelevant from an academic perspective
The idea that it means “People who are Norse or of Norse influenced culture” is a colloquial definition. It’s a folk definition. It is a definition used by common everyday people. It is not based in academic ideas, it’s based on modern conceptions of identity, nationhood and connections to the past. So I can’t produce the academics supporting it cause they don’t. But I was also never arguing that point.
i would hope not! you were beginning to worry me.
I don’t know why you would be worried. My argument hasn’t changed. It always maintained a divide between the academic and popular definitions of the term
I cant wait to get my hands on this
1 Like
shallow water basically confirmed:
Kind of funny that a discussion that was supposed to be about screenshots descended into an argument about what viking means, especially since the civ is called Norse.
Academic and technical definitions are irrelevant outside of academic and technical writing. As a non-contentious example, I’m a mathematician, and in mathematics the word group has a specific technical meaning that doesn’t match its everyday usage at all. In response to someone using the word group in its usual sense, it would be ridiculous for me to object and say “actually, that’s not technically a group”, and cite the mathematical definition as my reason. From my point of view, people who insist on using only the technical definition of viking are being just as ridiculous.
I take it you mean Shetland and Orkney, but they’d both been Christianised by the 11th century. Given the Norse civ is based on Norse mythology, its visuals should be based on that mythology and the people who believed it, not on later Christians.
Interesting perspective, but personally I don’t see why polytheistic religions that are currently practised would have less potential to cause offense than monotheistic ones. Personally, I’d probably avoid any mythology that still has a significant group of believers. Of course, monotheistic religions would be harder to fit into the standard format of choosing minor gods to worship, but depending on the religion there may be ways around that.
It’s probably like AoE3DE where shallow water can only be walked on by land units and ships can’t enter it.
1 Like
Yeah, people tend to forget that some polytheistic religions still exist to this day. As for monotheistic religions fitting in the game, I’ve suggested an “Abrahamic culture” which would include christians, jews and muslims. Minor gods would be replaced by angels and demons.
Of course, many people on this forum think this would be considered offensive to those who practice these religions. However, I know a few christians and muslims who would like to see their religion included in the game. So basically, whether it is offensive or not is a matter of opinion, not religion.
1 Like
Christian Saints are kinda the same as minor gods.
And funny enough Christianity happens to have 3 major gods too.
The father, the sun and the holy spirit.
The less funny part is that early Christians killed each other over how the trinity works.
Christian religion might be a very interesting way to bring (East)Rome to the game without overlapping to much with Atlantians and Greeks and without adding a civilisation that is more modern then the Norse.
Alternatively the Franks would be a good pick too. Franks as they where in the times of Charlemagne and not the high middle ages. The hero units would he the 12 Paladins.
The Song of Roland dates from the same time where most of the Norse mythology was written down.
Using early Christianity as a base would also avoid making it offensive to most modern Christians and it avoids having to split it into East and West.
It would be a lot harder to represent Islam or Judaism this way though.
DX12 listed in requirements suggests to me a further refined version of 3 DE’s engine
They promised raytracing support and I don’t think DX11 can do that.
I hope they backport the improvements to AoE3DE.
2 Likes
Academic and technical definitions are irrelevant outside of academic and technical writing. As a non-contentious example, I’m a mathematician, and in mathematics the word group has a specific technical meaning that doesn’t match its everyday usage at all. In response to someone using the word group in its usual sense, it would be ridiculous for me to object and say “actually, that’s not technically a group”, and cite the mathematical definition as my reason. From my point of view, people who insist on using only the technical definition of viking are being just as ridiculous.
Oh I agree. Which is why I’ve been using both the academic definition and the popular definition. My point was that Normans end up being vikings under both just for different reasons. It’s very pedantic to try and force an academic definition into a nonacademic space. Sometimes it is useful for clarity but it’s usually just used as a means to appeal to authority to shut down counterarguments.
Interesting perspective, but personally I don’t see why polytheistic religions that are currently practised would have less potential to cause offense than monotheistic ones. Personally, I’d probably avoid any mythology that still has a significant group of believers. Of course, monotheistic religions would be harder to fit into the standard format of choosing minor gods to worship, but depending on the religion there may be ways around that.
I mean they are already adding the Chinese pantheon which has hundreds of millions of active believers. Importantly polytheistic religions tend to have much smaller populations of mythical literalists and also tend to be open to cultural depictions of their deities. They don’t tend to get offended unless the depiction itself is offensive, in fact these populations tend to enjoy seeing their deities being depicted in media so long as it is respectful. Age of Mythology is the game that I’ve seen do the best job in this regard out of any mythology themed game I’ve played.
Canaanites could be added instead of Israelites and they could just avoid depicting YHWH at all or make him a minor god. Though that would be a bit weird since he is primarily known for being national deity and doesn’t really have cross over myths that aren’t from his own priestly caste. The big problem that I see is that Egypt uses a lot of things that should belong a Canaanite pantheon so they would need a big rework to add them
2 Likes