Unpopular opinion, should the Ottomans be a European or Asian civilization?

[princeofcarthage]

Both are different threads princess. #L2R

[PancakePrincess]

Pardon? All I said was that the poll OF THIS THREAD was in a complete equilibrium of 8-8-8 last I looked and that I found that kinda cool.

I'm afraid I don't follow : x

[Jets]

That's score... How could a nation that fighted wars in the hot deserts of africa, sailed the mediterranean sea and rode camels and elephants on asia, be part of the same continent/cultures as some brits and swedes.

No, you can't compare it to Rome.

[princeofcarthage]

Pardon? All I said was that the poll OF THIS THREAD was in a complete equilibrium of 8-8-8 last I looked and that I found that kinda cool.

I'm afraid I don't follow : x

Eh either you edited your post or I mistook you for marco

[Squamiger]

That's score... How could a nation that fighted wars in the hot deserts of africa, sailed the mediterranean sea and rode camels and elephants on asia, be part of the same continent/cultures as some brits and swedes.

No, you can't compare it to Rome.

how could a nation that fighted wars in hills and valleys around Vienna, sailed the coasts of france, and rode donkeys and pack horses through the balkans, be part of the same continent/cultures as some china and japan

no, you can't compare it to the Ming dynasty.

[Dolan]

how could a nation that fighted wars in hills and valleys around Vienna, sailed the coasts of france, and rode donkeys and pack horses through the balkans, be part of the same continent/cultures as some china and japan

no, you can't compare it to the Ming dynasty.

How could a nation that fought wars in swamps and forrests in Saigon, sailed the coasts of the South China Sea and flew helicopters through the Vietnamese jungle be part of the same continent/cultures as North America wtf.

How could a nation that invaded Eastern Europe, like the Mongols, be considered part of the same continent/cultures as some Mongolia. No, you can't compare the mongols with the mongols, they invaded Europe and the Middle East at some point, so they must be European or Middle Eastern.

[duckzilla]

That's score... How could a nation that fighted wars in the hot deserts of africa, sailed the mediterranean sea and rode camels and elephants on asia, be part of the same continent/cultures as some brits and swedes.

No, you can't compare it to Rome.

Sounds like you are describing the Greeks of Alexander the Great.

[Dolan]

Greeks confirmed Asian.

[scarm]

Sincere question Dolan: To apply the argument of political culture you are often using, couldn't it be that you are a bit too biased in the direction of the Ottomans being a foreign invasor due to your countries and the regions history with them? Not trying to belittle your arguments or imply you don't have a point, just something to maybe reflect upon. I am also generally interested how 'the ottoman' past is dealt with and perceived in southeastern europe.

[princeofcarthage]

That is in past with completely different empires. Modern day people have little to no connection with that history. I don't see a reason to be upset about it.

[scarm]

That is not my point, my point is that back in the day the Ottomans were obviously demonized and their otherness and strangeness pronounced more than they actually were 'evil' or different because that usually is what happens between enemies, to mobilize the population and so on. Traditional images like that can carry over and often influence the behavior of actors nowadays. Dolan himself often uses this line of argument (e.g. the americans exaggerated love for corporate freedom), so whether you agree with it or not (it certainly can be disputed) isn't really that relevant to my argument, because i am only addressing Dolan.

[Dolan]

@scarm That's possible. It's impossible to completely escape your own culture, and implicitly, the biases that come from it.
However, I wouldn't make an argument if I knew it's completely untenable, even if I'd like that argument to be true.

The legacy of the Otto empire here is mixed. It's not much of a touchy subject in Romania, probably because we were not really under Ottoman occupation (like the Hungarians or Bulgarians were), we just had to pay the jizya and accept, to some extent, their involvement in how our rulers were appointed/elected. Romanians' history is replete with waves of incoming invasions (Visigoths, Avars, Cumans, Mongols [+ gypsies], Hungarians, Pechenegs, then Ottomans and Russians), so it's possible that this long experience with invasions has created an attitude of general mistrust for large numbers of foreign occupiers. That's part of the misfortune of being the geographical gateway to Europe. Every tribe that tried to come to Europe from Asia had to pass through these lands and while you could have maybe defended against one, you couldn't have defended against all these waves. Definitely not against bigger tribes and empires, like the Mongols, Ottos and Russians.

This is one of the reasons why medieval Romanian principalities have failed to develop a proper "Burg" civilisation, like the West. There were few cities, mostly fortified citadels that served as capitals for the ruler, but the vast expanse of land was mostly rural habitats. And this has been the case until mid-19th century, when a forced process of modernisation began. So there is a perception here that this unfortunate geographical position has exposed us to multiple invasions that have stunted our civilisational growth. You couldn't build nice cities, architecture, castles, parks, libraries here during the Middle Ages, when they could be all burned down by an incoming horde of Mongols in just a few days. It would have been a complete waste and it wouldn't have helped you survive as a people. So, I think Romanians adapted to this situation by not committing too much to developing local structures, cities, etc, that could be wiped out too fast. It made them live with this mentality of improvisation and temporary compromise, until "better times" come. So, in a way, there probably is some general negative attitude towards foreign occupiers that are perceived to have dashed any chance to catch up with the rest of Europe and forced us to live under the threat of possible occupation. Romanians' attitude towards Russians definitely shows that: while we're partially genetically related to Slavs (like 30%) and we identify with their hearty mentality, we don't trust them at all. I mean, we like and trust ordinary Russian people, but when we think about Russians collectively and the negative influence they had on our history and territorial integrity, there's a lot of suspicion. And there's no doubt that ethnic Russians are mostly European.

That's why I doubt that it's my biases that make me hold this position, because if negative historical experience was the motive to deny Ottomans being European, then I'd have just as many reasons to deny that Russians are European. But I clearly can't do that, since the evidence would be against me.

[princeofcarthage]

"I am also generally interested how 'the ottoman' past is dealt with and perceived in southeastern europe." I was mostly referring to that.

[Le Hussard sur le toit]

That's score... How could a nation that fighted wars in the hot deserts of africa, sailed the mediterranean sea and rode camels and elephants on asia, be part of the same continent/cultures as some brits and swedes.

No, you can't compare it to Rome.

Strange to say that France is not European.

[chronique]

That's score... How could a nation that fighted wars in the hot deserts of africa, sailed the mediterranean sea and rode camels and elephants on asia, be part of the same continent/cultures as some brits and swedes.

No, you can't compare it to Rome.

Strange to say that France is not European.

France is universal, this country have land in litterraly every continent arround the globe (if iam not wrong its unique)

[helln00]

Greeks confirmed Asian.

its going to get really weird talking about all the greek kingdoms in bactria and india.

[Jotunir]

I just want to add one thing to this thread. Thank god for the winged hussars, they arrived just in time (They are a great shipment for germany by the way).

You'll like this song then

I love it <3
(I always listen to this song when I send the shipment)

[Jets]

It appears that my words weren't the best, but I'll go with that "drunk man of europe" definition for now. Seems more accurate.

In the end, we just need a geography expert to explain this topic.

[chris1089]

"I am also generally interested how 'the ottoman' past is dealt with and perceived in southeastern europe." I was mostly referring to that.

I doubt the genocide is looked upon fondly. Idk about the non-muslim taxes and occupation etc.

[princeofcarthage]

"I am also generally interested how 'the ottoman' past is dealt with and perceived in southeastern europe." I was mostly referring to that.

I doubt the genocide is looked upon fondly. Idk about the non-muslim taxes and occupation etc.

It doesn't matter how an event in history is looked upon in present. It doesn't matter as there is no one to take responsibility. Ottoman empire doesn't exist. People who committed those genocides don't exist. Most of them atleast. There is no one left to pin the blame. There is no one left who can pin the blame. On the contrary UK is still the empire it was albeit with less land and influence. Yet it has never publicly admitted neither corrected its mistake.

[Dolan]

[Joshua667746]

honestly cuz they were introduced in the aoe3 vanilla, euroooooooooo. yo also anyone ever come across the dutch duccan fast IV with mass culvarines and hatamoto. rushed em as otto, them recovered into ff and pushed, then IV then pushed, some how he always had units. like he had 28 vils when i was like 60+. does 20ish hatamoto and rest of ur pop in culvs check out with dutch havigng 28 vils and banks and factories. he made 10 elmeti and 10 manhu as well

[oxaloacetate]

such argument

[princeofcarthage]

Unless and until you change the basic flawed education and mindset of people, all these accords, institutions are pretty much useless.

[Ryuuka]

WOW. I'm surprised with the thoughts on this topic. I was expecting more from this community but nevermind. It's kinda funny to see someone from vietnam say turkish people are greeks who got conquered... People in america are sioux and aztecs who got conquered then. There was gallic tribes in Anatolia way before, only thing these can mean is, your national identity thoughts are just childish.. I will try to inform you anyway. I have no idea about your country's history so i'm not talking about it. you should be doing so. It's cringy to answers these things but since you have no hesitation to say these nonsense opinions; ottoman empire is its own thing in this game. there is no must to be classified as european or asian country to be in AOE3. Again,there is no such classification. turkish people have less relation to asian cultures as regards to european cultures. turkish people has their own culture and traditions (with influences from islamic and european cultures). About the classifying in the game(which you dont care about at all but yet you are talking about nationalties and trying to insult peoples you dont even know) yes it should've been first part of the game like it is because of the historical parts in campaign.

AOE3 never classified civs of the base game as europeans but yet you guys in a need to do it.It's a unpopular opinion because its not even a opinion just a dumb cringy nationalist ideas which does not suit to people of 2021. No one chooses their country before born. If you support any national idea without hesitation then you should do better than that. As a person, you don't even choose your nationality. I wish everyone will get better than that, as a turkish person I see no etnicity below or above me and being considered in an asian or european civ is both positive things for me.