Extra Pack Finalization Project, parts 1-4 compiled

[godinex]

And the first city in south america is Caral and is about 4000 years old... so its the first incan City... I have the info if You e\want I will puit in here... but i in spanish

[Wernazuma III]

No te preocupes, lo voy a entender perfectamente.

[Beren]

I really think the Arab leader should be Prophet Mohammed. I know somebody said it would be insult to the Islam, but I am not sure about that. I read something about it and Mohammed was not sacred or holy. He was just a man who happened to be chosen by God to spread the word.

[godinex]

Gracias a Dios! Por que no tenemos un foro en español de Civ3?

Thanx to God! Why the latin american and the spanish people do not have our own forum?

[godinex]

Here is the info... in english

For Immediate Release
Contact: Greg Borzo
(312) 665-7100

Anthropologists Establish Date and Importance of the Americas’ Oldest City


Thursday, April 26, 2001

CHICAGO – New radiocarbon dates indicate that the site of Caral (120 miles north of Lima, Peru) was home to the earliest known urban settlement – with monumental corporate architecture and irrigation agriculture – in the New World. The surprising evidence pushes the development of these important advances in the Americas back to as early as 2627 B.C. – a time when the pyramids were being built in Egypt.

In a report published in the April 27, 2001 issue of Science, Dr. Ruth Shady Solis of the Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos in Lima and her colleagues, Jonathan Haas, Chicago’s Field Museum, and Winifred Creamer, of Northern Illinois University and Field Museum Adjunct Curator, describe the results of the testing of plant fibers taken from excavations conducted by Dr. Shady at Caral.

Sitting on a dry desert terrace above the green valley floor, Caral is one of 18 large contemporary sites in the Supe Valley on the Pacific Coast of Peru. Together, the sites indicate a remarkably advanced civilization for this period – despite a lack of ceramics that has puzzled anthropologists for years.

This lack of ceramics contributed to the Supe Valley sites being largely overlooked ever since they were first noted almost 100 years ago. But this new research has established that Caral thrived some 4,600 years ago – even before the introduction of ceramics in Peru – and played a pivotal role in the social, political and economic development of civilization in South America.

"The location offers an opportunity to investigate one of the fundamental questions of Western archeology and social science, namely, what is the origin of complex, centralized, highly organized society in the Americas?" Dr. Haas said. "This is a project that comes along once in a generation and offers opportunities rarely glimpsed in the field of archeology."

The radiocarbon samples from Caral were taken in connection with the on-going research being undertaken by Dr. Shady and her team of students from the Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos in Lima. These Excavations at the site are focused on assessing the range and function of architectural features and determining the sequence and construction methods of the site’s monumental mounds.

Pyramids dominate landscape

Caral is dominated by a central zone containing six large platform mounds arranged around a huge public plaza area. The largest of these mounds, "Piramide Mayor," is truly remarkable: 60-feet high and 450-by-500 feet at the base. Research indicates that all six central mounds were built in only one or two phases, indicating the presence of complex planning, centralized decision-making, and mobilization of large labor forces.

The terraced mounds were used for administrative purposes. Stairs, rooms, courtyards and other structures were constructed on top of the pyramids as well as on the side terraces. Excavations will determine whether there were rooms, passageways or even tombs inside the mounds.

Other architecture at the site indicates a high level of cultural complexity. The varied styles and quality of Caral’s housing point to a richly stratified society. And three sunken circular plazas at the site testify to the emergence of a well-organized religion with open, public ceremonies. The largest of these sunken plazas is 150 feet in diameter. Such plazas are an architectural form that continued throughout the Andes for several thousand years.

Ultimately, the social, political and religious system founded in the Supe Valley provided ancestral roots for the great civilization of the Incas, who ruled the Andes some 4,000 years later when the first Europeans arrived in the 16th century A.D.

Other villages in Peru were occupied before 2600 B.C., and some of them even had small-scale public platforms or stone rings. However, all of the sites in the Americas occupied in the 3rd millennium B.C. are dwarfed by the 200-acre size of Caral and its huge monuments. Of the 18 recorded preceramic sites in the Supe Valley, 10 are more than 60 acres in size. Any one of these ten, if taken alone, would probably be the largest settlement in the New World during the 3rd millennium B.C. Collectively, this concentration of urban settlements – all with monumental architecture and all based on irrigation – is simply unparalleled in any period.

Caral’s location some 14 miles inland from the Pacific is also important. Because the Peruvian coast is extremely arid, the only source of water for fields is the Supe River, and the only way to get the river water to arable land is by way of irrigation canals Thus, as Dr. Creamer noted, "the farmers at Caral may have been the Americas’ first pioneers to build canals and open the vast potential of channeling river water to rich desert lands surrounding a river’s valley bottom."

Caral’s domesticated plants included squash, beans and cotton. No corn has been found, and its absence establishes for the first time that this starchy staple was not necessary to the development of a complex society in South America.

In sum, this research shows that Caral and the Supe Valley is exceptional because of:



its early date for an urban center
its large size
the presence of irrigation agriculture
its huge, monumental architecture
its pristine, relatively unexplored condition
the existence of nearby contemporary
sites of comparable magnitude.


This research was funded by the National Geographic Society; Peru’s National Institute of Culture; Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos in Lima; the National Museum of Natural History; and the Northern Illinois University Foundation.

[godinex]

Originally posted by Beren
I really think the Arab leader should be Prophet Mohammed. I know somebody said it would be insult to the Islam, but I am not sure about that. I read something about it and Mohammed was not sacred or holy. He was just a man who happened to be chosen by God to spread the word.

I´m with You. But Saladin is best!

[dunk]

Originally posted by godinex
This research was funded by the National Geographic Society; Peru’s National Institute of Culture; Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos in Lima; the National Museum of Natural History; and the Northern Illinois University Foundation.

Great info... why the frowny face?

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by Beren
I really think the Arab leader should be Prophet Mohammed. I know somebody said it would be insult to the Islam, but I am not sure about that. I read something about it and Mohammed was not sacred or holy. He was just a man who happened to be chosen by God to spread the word.

It goes against Muslim beliefs to depict the Prophet- even in Persian and Turkish miniatures and paintings, and Mogul Paintings, the Prophet's face is never shown. Muhammad himself denied any 'quasi-divine' status. Nonetheless, this would be like having Abraham as leader of the Jews. A more avowedly secular leader (such as Haroun al Rashid, or Omar) is better.

[godinex]

Originally posted by dunk999


Great info... why the frowny face?

Because the info is in english... I love Spanish... and Moly Bloom is correct. It could be very offensive if we think in that way.
And I have a question: Why Simon Bolivar is not a great leader of the Incans? ... just think the posibilyty.

[Eli]

Arafat as an Arab leader? Are you out of your minds?

He's a leader of a small very young Arab nation. He's in the headlines today, but he's definetely not an "Arab leader".


As for the Hebrews. I say we should call the people Hebrews and the nation should be called Israel.
I have no problems with Saul as a great leader, but I prefer to spell Merkava with a K and without an H.

[Tiberius]

I'm sure it was discussed before, but for my own curiosity:

Why is the turk leader Mehmet (I guess Mehmet II, the Conqueror, right ?) and not Suleyman (The Magnificent) ?

Also, somebody said it before that the janissaries should be more offensive; I agree with that. They used them all the time in attacking Europe. But probably the AI won't use it anyway as an offensive unit.

[Wernazuma III]

That's a tough one, becauase both of them make excellent rulers, both conquered big areas for the Ottomans. I think Mehmet was prefered because he conquered Constantinople. This conquest - although predictable marks the entry of the Turks as a "constant factor" in European history. But whether Mehmet or Suleyman was never a "hard discussion", IMHO almost everyone here can live with either choice.
About the Janissary: The french Musketeer already has 3/4/1 and I try not to have identical UUs. The additional movement on the other hand is actually also an offensive bonus that should not be underestimated.

[Tiberius]

I'm sorry, I missed the extra movement point. That's very good, but I'd still give them an attack of 3.

About tle leader: I think Suleyman was "bigger" but because Mehmet started the whole Ottoman expansion, so I can live with it.

Btw. the name:It was the "Ottoman Empire" for about 600 years, and it is "Turkey" for only 100 years. Nevertheless, I can uderstand this choice.

[JamesJKirk]

What's up with the Poles, Koreans and Khmer all shunning Communism, I understand that today it's not very popular with the people there, but all 3 of those places were ruled by Communist regimes. The favored/shunned choice shouldn't be what people of a nation like and hate the most, but it should be what they were most likely to be ruled under. I mean the Khmer Rouge were quite infamous, Poland was Communist about 5 times longer than it's been a democracy (And happens to now have the former Communists in charge) and half of Korea is still Communist.

That being said, everything looks great! (except maybe for the aforementioned special-warrior dominated Americas, and an insanely packed Europe vs. other parts of the world which will be relatively empty, but perhaps I'm now nitpicking

[Wernazuma III]

If it were only about which regime was the longest, probably all civs would favor Monarchy. Anyway, I understand your point.
Some notes on the specific cases:

Poland: 34 years Democracy vs. 44 years Communism, which btw. were not chosen by Poles themselves, is no clear statement for Communism. I guess Poles shunning Communism was primarily chosen because of the close friendship between French and Poles since the French revolution, ideas which the Poles favored much.

Korea: I think you're right in this. Probably we should not make Communism favored either, what do you think Koreans should shun?

Khmer: As a leftist I have severe problems to call Cambodjan Communism really "Communism" (just like in Korea). Anyhow, you got a point in this too. Thinking about it, they probably should shun Democracy, but I'm not sure. Ideas?

[dunk]

Originally posted by JamesJKirk
(except maybe for the aforementioned special-warrior dominated Americas

Good point, playing next to these guys will be a difficult challenge in the ancient era.

Remember, a 2-1-1 warrior is 100% more powerful on attack than a regular warrior. The Mounted Warrior is only 50% more powerful than the Horseman. The Immortal is only 33% better than the Swordsman. It seems the Inca and Maya will have units that are 100% better on offense or defense than their rivals for a time.

[Wernazuma III]

You're right on this, it is tough, but:

On an Earth map it won't be that much of a problem as most American civs get that early bonus, especially those two which are especially close (Aztec and Maya).
And on random maps: In the original game there is one civ with such an early bonus and now with the double number of civs we have three of them. I don't think it would be too much of a problem.
Anyhow, I'm pretty sure that we will find several problems regarding game balance once the mod will be done and we'll have to make changes afterwards. Until then I'd say we give it a try. Moreover, having a spearman-substitute would mean an overall of 4 spearman-UUs.

[JamesJKirk]

Are you including the post-WWI years under Pilsudski as part of Polish democracy? Just curious...Anyway, one of my points was that regardless of whether the government was chosen by them or imposed on them, it was their government for a number of years. I wouldn't regard the current government of Germany any less legitimate even though it was imposed on them post WWII.

I understand your hesitation to label those regimes Communist, but just remember it's with a big C and not a little one Besides Civ is abstract, and it's Communist government is really just supposed to be a catchall of all those states that call(ed) themselves Communist. But nonetheless, I'm no real expert on Asian history, so I think that the decision of what to shun should be left to someone else, although Republic could be a decent choice, yes?

Someone earlier suggested an Incan Archer as the UU, as that's what was used in AOE, I think. That could be worth looking in to, as the graphic for it would be easily obtainable, plus for balance.

Is Ethiopia the only African civ added to this? That's going to be one empty-@$$ continent, as will South America. I know the voting's closed, but there's a plethora of worthy civs, especially in West Africa to draw from

[dunk]

I'm not complaining about the warrior replacements. I don't think all the civs should necessarily be balanced as you can select which civ you are and which other civs are in your game anyway.

I think all the civs that got mentioned in the initial voting for this Extra Civs Pack could be put in the next one. There should be as many civs as possible to choose from.

[DTRY]

Khmer
Names: Khmer, the Khmer, Khmer
Ruler/Title: Jayavarman VII/ Deva-Raja
Leaders: Soma, Suryavarman, Indravarman, Yasovarman, Rajendravarman
UU: Phak'akMan (2/3/1); requires Iron; replaces Pikeman
Shunned/Favored Gov.: Communism, Monarchy
Cities:
...
Phimai
Phanom Rung
Buriram
Vientiane
Srisatchanalai
Sukhothai
Saigon
Hue
Ayuthaya
Lop Buri
Pali
Chantaburi
...

Well, since I'm a Thai, I think I have some knowledge about Khmer civilization.

First of all, what the heck is the Phak'akMan? Honestly, I've never heard of it. I think Khmer unique unit should be war elephant, but it has been taken by the Indian already. Maybe a modern unit called Khmer Rouge? Just an infantry which treats all terrain as road. Hey, even Hebrews get Modern Armour replacement!

The ruler, well... didn't Suryavarman build Angkor Wat? He can also be the ruler (O.K. he can also be portrayed as a great leader to rush a wonder). But Jayavaraman VII is also fine.

Shunned government shouldn't be communist. They were communist. And it shouldn't be democracy either since they are using it now. It should be republic since I have never heard of Khmer or Cambodian republic. The favoured government is fine.

About cities name :
Panomrung is the name of a Khmer style castle in Buriram, choose either of them.
Phimai is also the name of a Khmer style castle in Nakhon Ratchasima (Korat), it's up to you to choose the castle name or the real province now.
Vientiane is on the northern part of Laos, I don't think the Khmer empire was that big.
Sukhothai and Srisatchanalai are on the northern part of Thailand (or Siam), again, I don't think the Khmer empire was that big. Sukhothai is definitely not a Khmer city since it was an old capital of Siam which was trying to get rid of Khmer influence.
Ayuddhaya is also definitely not a Khmer city. It was another old capital of Siam after Sukhothai period. Ayuddhaya even challenged and conquered the Khmer kingdom itself!
Lop Buri is a valid Khmer city. There are old Khmer style castles in this province.
Hue and Saigon are Viatnamese cities. Well, yes, Khmer once conquered Viatnam. But Viatnam also battled Khmer frequently after Khmer's golden age.
Pali is a language used in Buddhism books and scriptures. Is there a real city name Pali?

Other than that, I'm impressed by your research. Especially the title Deva-Raja. It's a Hindu belief which is believed in Khmer and other Southeast Asia countries at that times.

By the way, no Siamese civilization? It grew after the downfall of Khmer empire and became an important kingdom before imperialism era. It's the only Southeast Asia nation which has never been colonized. Oh well, I guess it's too similar to the Khmer then (we recieved some Khmer influences). And we don't have a monumental wonder such as Angkor Wat and Angkor Thom.

[Wernazuma III]

Thanks DTRY, good tips.
The "Phak'Ak" is a weapon similar to a pike, probably very similar to many east asian pike weapons (couldn't find a picture). I liked the unit because as you said the Elephant is already in use and additionally we a) manage to have a "pikeman UU" (it's the only pikeman replacement) and b) have a unit that fits in the period of the Khmer empire.

I'll change the shunned gov.

About the city names: I'll let most of them as they are, but I'll remove Pali. OK, maybe it's not 100% correct to merge south-east asian civs so much, but like the "Babylonians" seem to cover all Mesopotamia (even Ashur!)and the Aztecs include all other civs from the valley of Mexico, I think that's OK (if not, just teach me otherwise)

The research btw. was done by Locutus.

[Arrian]

Sorry to butt in, but don't you think the Woad Warrior is unbalancing? It's a Mounted Warrior with defense! That's an incredibly powerful unit.

Just a thought...

-Arrian

[Locutus]

Originally posted by DTRY
First of all, what the heck is the Phak'akMan?

Not my call, I never heard of it either. But quite frankly, I don't know any other alternative, next to War elephant.

Personally I don't like laying a link between an ancient civilization and a modern political party/country (this applies to Hebrew/Israel as well) at all. There's no direct link between the Khmer Kingdoms and Pol Pot & Co. I personally think this would make very little sense, in case of the Khmer even less than in case of the Hebrew (at least modern Israel is actually a country).

The ruler, well... didn't Suryavarman build Angkor Wat? He can also be the ruler (O.K. he can also be portrayed as a great leader to rush a wonder). But Jayavaraman VII is also fine.

Yes, it was a tough choice but I eventually gave Jayavaraman the benefit of the doubt. He was the more 'aggressive' builder of the two (he built an extensive road network, Angkor Thom, Ta Phrom, etc). Suryavarman put almost all his engery in a single structure, namely Angkor Wat.

Shunned government shouldn't be communist. They were communist. And it shouldn't be democracy either since they are using it now. It should be republic since I have never heard of Khmer or Cambodian republic. The favoured government is fine.

I can agree with this.

As far as the city list goes, I would like to explain that I wasn't done with that list yet. I had made a draft for my own (CtP2) mod when Wernazuma needed help for this mod and I posted a rough draft. Wernazuma couldn't wait for the final list (in retrospect a good call, I'm still not done) and removed the most iffy city names from the list and used that. Had I further refined the list, I certainly would have done further research and added more cities.

Panomrung is the name of a Khmer style castle in Buriram, choose either of them.

Buriram is both a city and a province. Phanom Rung is a Khmer city 50km or so south of the city of Buriram. Both have Khmer originins.

Phimai is also the name of a Khmer style castle in Nakhon Ratchasima (Korat), it's up to you to choose the castle name or the real province now.

Same as above. Both Korat and Phimai were both Khmer cities (the city of Phimai lies 50km north-east of the city of Korat). Phimai in particular was important but Korat itself is worth mentioning as well (Korat is the more important of the two today, I guess that explains why the entire province was called after Korat rather than Phimai).

Both Buriram and Korat are fairly important Thai cities today, I'm almost getting the feeling I'm making a horrible mistake here since you apparently only know them as provinces. Please correct me if this is the case

Vientiane is on the northern part of Laos, I don't think the Khmer empire was that big.

Actually, at it was. At its peak, Angkor Empire extended from the border of modern day Burma east to the South China Sea and north to Laos. Although I do not know the precise borders of the Khmer Empire (I doubt such clear-cut borders existed at all), but I've found numerous sources which confirmed the Vientane region was once part of the Khmer empire.

Sukhothai and Srisatchanalai are on the northern part of Thailand (or Siam), again, I don't think the Khmer empire was that big. Sukhothai is definitely not a Khmer city since it was an old capital of Siam which was trying to get rid of Khmer influence.

Actually, the Thai obtained the city by driving out the Khmer. Before that, Sukhothai was actually a relatively important Khmer frontier city. Not on the same level as Angkor Wat of course, but still a city worth mentioning. My explanation on the extend of the Khmer Empire applies to Srisatchanalai as well.

Ayuddhaya is also definitely not a Khmer city. It was another old capital of Siam after Sukhothai period. Ayuddhaya even challenged and conquered the Khmer kingdom itself!

Ayutthaya, before becoming arguably the most important city in Thai history (whose rise was indeed largely at the expense of the Khmer Empire), was a Khmer frontier city, just like Sukhothai. From what I can tell I don't think it was a very important city under the Khmer, but considering it's further history I thought it was worth including.

Hue and Saigon are Viatnamese cities. Well, yes, Khmer once conquered Viatnam. But Viatnam also battled Khmer frequently after Khmer's golden age.

Same story here as before: they *were* once Khmer. Just as the Annam controlled parts of Cambodia during their golden age, the Khmer controlled much of Southern Vietnam during their peak. Saying that Saigon shouldn't be included on the Khmer city list because it fought the Khmer later on is IMHO a bit like saying Londinium or Palmyra shouldn't be on the Roman city list.

Pali is a language used in Buddhism books and scriptures. Is there a real city name Pali?

Yes, I wasn't sure about this one, I will probably eventually have scratch it once I research further. Apparently the language was named after an inscription which was found near the town of Pali. But that means the town would be included merely for it's archeological value, not it's actual historical value (quite frankly, I have no idea how important Pali is/was).

Other than that, I'm impressed by your research. Especially the title Deva-Raja. It's a Hindu belief which is believed in Khmer and other Southeast Asia countries at that times.

Thanks. I find SE Asia one of the most fascinating historical regions in the world (only surpassed by Africa). I've read a fair amount about it. Not too long ago (but after I compiled the information on the Khmer for this Pack), I found out that I will actually be able to visit the region a few weeks from now, very exciting! Since this visit is related to my study, I actually had to write a few preperatory reports on the region and was able to dive even deeper into the matter... Unfortunately I won't be able to visit most of the former Khmer Empire, but I will visit the equally interesting Malaysian Peninsula (Singapore, Batam Island, Melaka, Kuala Lumpur - traveling by bus and train) and visit Bangkok and immediate surroundings for a week

By the way, no Siamese civilization? It grew after the downfall of Khmer empire and became an important kingdom before imperialism era. It's the only Southeast Asia nation which has never been colonized. Oh well, I guess it's too similar to the Khmer then (we recieved some Khmer influences). And we don't have a monumental wonder such as Angkor Wat and Angkor Thom.

Yes, I would have liked to have seen a Thai/Siamese civ as well but alas, there are only 31 places available and the choice was made democratically...

[DTRY]

Well, I've seen the post which has a vote for new civilizations. So I can accept the fact that Khmer civilization is more famous than Siamese. No comment then. At least it's better than AOE2 which Khmer was cut off in the last vote against Korean. I guess that's because Koreans buy more softwares than Khmer.

About UU/ruler connection, I know that Khmer civilization, lead by Jayavarman, sounds just ridiculous with Khmer Rouge as UU. But other civilizations also have strange UU/ruler connections such as Riders/Mao, War Elephants/Gandhi and F-15/Lincoln. All these civilizations have UUs and rulers from completely different era. So, why can't Khmer?

By the way, I don't think adding +1 attack point for the Phak'akMan will help. When other civilizations have pikemen you won't use a unit which has 2 attack point for attack. So adding +1 attack point would be a waste, in my humble opinion. Can you adjust it so it doesn't require iron, just like War Elephant? I think this way it should be more useful.

About Buriram and Korat province, actually it is a "Changwat" in Thai language, which can be translate as both city and province (confusing, eh? ). But if province means large region which contains many cities, then these 2 Changwats are cities since they contain one city each.

Panomrung castle is in the city of Buriram, and Phimai castle is in the city of Korat. But if they are separate cities back in the ancient time, you can use all of them as city names.

About other city names, well, I admit that you have done much research than me. Actually our Thai history class never teachs any history prior to Sukhothai period. What a shame. So I don't know really much about Khmer civilization. I just know that they had a big empire which influenced all Southeast Asia region and later our ancestors tried to liberate themselves from Khmer rules. What I learned in class is the struggle of our ancestors versus the empire of Burma. The Khmer was out of the picture at that time and became an Ayuddhaya's dependency.

[Wernazuma III]

Thanks DTRY. I didn't think about the weak effect of just adding 1 attack. I'll think about it, though removing the required iron already seems to be a good idea.

[Locutus]

Originally posted by DTRY
About UU/ruler connection, I know that Khmer civilization, lead by Jayavarman, sounds just ridiculous with Khmer Rouge as UU. But other civilizations also have strange UU/ruler connections such as Riders/Mao, War Elephants/Gandhi and F-15/Lincoln. All these civilizations have UUs and rulers from completely different era. So, why can't Khmer?

I don't like most of those choices either. But in case of the Khmer it's even worse IMHO. To the best of my knowledge, Khmer Rouge is a political group, not a nation (let alone a civilization). Not all Khmer Rouge members are of the Khmer 'race' and not all Khmer are Khmer Rouge members. The link between the two is very indirect if you ask me. But although I don't agree with it, I can see your point...

About Buriram and Korat province, actually it is a "Changwat" in Thai language, which can be translate as both city and province (confusing, eh? ).

Nah, lately I've been studying the Thai language a bit as preparation for my trip and it's not confusing at all

Panomrung castle is in the city of Buriram, and Phimai castle is in the city of Korat. But if they are separate cities back in the ancient time, you can use all of them as city names.

Hmm, not according to my data. Let me quote one of dozens of travel sites on the Internet (in this case Travel Thailand): "60 km outside Korat, Prasat Hin Phmai National Historical Park near Phimai contains impressive 10th and 11th century Khmer ruins older than Cambodia’s Angkor Wat." (Map here)

Doesn't sound like it's the same city to me, but then again, I've never actually been there... Information on the geographic location Panomrung is harder to find but according to the University of Leiden: "Phanom Rung is situated 112 km southeast of Nakhon Rachasima and 64 km south of Buri Ram (see picture 1, below)." (Map here).

Feel free to correct me if these sources are all wrong...

I used to know a single comprehensive high-quality site on all major temples, castles and ruins in Thailand but I'm afraid I lost the URL But the links to the interactive map I gave are pretty good as well, I'd say...

About other city names, well, I admit that you have done much research than me.

Thanks. And that while it's basically still a draft

Actually our Thai history class never teachs any history prior to Sukhothai period. What a shame.

I can imagine that you don't learn too much about the Khmer, although that's certainly a pity - unfortunately such narrow-mindedness in history (and other affairs) is all too common, not just in your school or country But surely they teach (tought?) you about Ban Chiang or Nanchao?

What I learned in class is the struggle of our ancestors versus the empire of Burma.

Why am I not surprised?

[DTRY]

O.K. I understand why using Khmer Rouge is impossible. Well, I think the Phak'akMan needs some fix then.

About Phimai/Korat problem, now I have a confirmed source from Tourism Authority of Thailand. Phimai is a sandstone castle located in Amphoe Phimai (Phimai district) in Changwat Korat (Korat or Nakhon Ratchasima province). There are other 3 Prasat Hin (stone castle) in Korat province : Phanom Wan, Nang Ram and Pha Kho (well, Korat is a very big province).

So, if you want to choose today's city name, choose Korat since Phimai is just a district in Korat province. But if you think that each castles had large communities in the ancient time and can be classified as separate cities, then use all castle names instead.

Also, Prasat Hin Phanom Rung is located in Amphoe Chalerm Prakiat in Buriram province. Other castles in Buriram province are Nong Hong, Ban Kok Ngiew (with ancient hospital nearby). Again, if you think these castles had large communities (Ban Kok Ngiew had hospital) and can be classified as cities, use them. But if you want today's city name choose Buriram.

[Locutus]

DTRY,
As you can read on the website you linked Prasat Hin Phimai is the castle, which is "almost situated in the center of Phimai Ancient city". So Phimai was definitely more than just a castle, according to that source. Elsewhere I've read that other names we discussed here were also ancient Khmer cities, so that's enough evidence for me to include them as cities for now (but as I said, the list is basically still a draft, I might throw them out of the list in the future - if I ever get around to finishing the list).

Anyway, the and other other city/temple/castle names website you mentioned are very useful, thanks for those. I'll keep those at hand when/if I continue working on my city lists for the Khmer and Thai for CtP2. (Speaking of which, could I have some advise from you as a local: should I refer to the present-day capital as Bangkok or as Krung Thep? Also, are there more cities in Thailand beside Bangkok that have a different name among foreigners than among the Thai?)

[DTRY]

Originally posted by Locutus
DTRY,
As you can read on the website you linked Prasat Hin Phimai is the castle, which is "almost situated in the center of Phimai Ancient city". So Phimai was definitely more than just a castle, according to that source.

Whoops! Missed that. Sorry, I must be .

should I refer to the present-day capital as Bangkok or as Krung Thep?

Bangkok the an older name of Krung Thep since it was a mere city. King Rama I had moved the capital from Thon Buri to Bangkok due to good strategic value of the city. But the name Bangkok has no particular meaning. So, according to astrological reasons, he gave Bangkok the new name "Krung Thep Maha Nakorn etc." which has good meaning. Good meaning will ensure that no one can capture it (hopefully ).

So, if you want Bangkok to be the capital, use the name "Krung Thep" (but some people may not know that it is the same city). But if you decide to use Ayuddhaya or Sukhothai as capital, use the name Bangkok.

Also, are there more cities in Thailand beside Bangkok that have a different name among foreigners than among the Thai?)

Not that I know of. Also, some Thais still call it Bangkok instead of Krung Thep.

[Locutus]

But the name Bangkok has no particular meaning

Actually, it does. It's Chinese for "Village of the Wild Plum" - before it became the Thai capital it was a tiny Chinese fisherman's village

I'm probably making Ayutthaya the capital followed by Sukhothai, Krung Thep, Chiang Mai and Thon Buri (in that order), as those were all the capitals of (the most important) Thai states. I was planning to use Krung Thep because before it was renamed it was a village of very little significance, your reasoning of calling it Krung Thep if it represents the capital makes me more confident about this decision (even though I'm not doing exactly what you meant). The good meaning helps too, as I except to play with the Thai a lot (I don't in the default CtP2 game because the city list is so d*mn poor - Sukothai isn't even on it ) Thanks for that.