Opinion: My Beef With Cleopatra

Whenever I'm asked who my favorite historical figure is, I often try to deflect the question: I have a lot of them, and they seem to jockey back and forth in position constantly while new ones are always being added to the list. But when asked who my least favorite is, my answer is always the same: Cleopatra VII Philopator. Yes, THAT Cleopatra.

That said, I an now and forever will be in love with
Elizabeth Taylor

My issue isn't that I necessarily dislike her personally (obviously I never met her). When it comes to studying historical figures, I think it's important to do so objectively and with as little bias as possible. It doesn't matter how "bad" or "good" that person may have been; my job as a historian is to rationally analyze the person and their actions, look at why they did what they did,  what effects those actions had, and what outside forces where working on, with, or against that person.

Where I have a problem with Cleopatra is the near constant need to make her into a role model. History is FULL of people, all flawed, who make excellent role-models, but she isn't one in my mind. In part, I think a lot of the glamorization of her comes from the romanticized caricature of her in popular culture; Shakespeare and Elizabeth Taylor's depiction of her are particularly prominent. But that's the issue: these aren't objective looks at a historical figure, they're dramatized depictions created for entertainment and not education.

Don't even get me started on this garbage

Cleopatra did have certain admirable qualities. She was the first of her dynasty to actually learn the Egyptian language, to better know her people. This is important; for around 300 years her family, the Macedonian Ptolemaic Dynasty, had ruled Egypt and all of them spoke only Greek. While government continued to operate in this language, and it was probably the one she spoke on a daily basis, she did put in the effort. She had some level of political skill, and was able to secure the throne for herself alone without having to share it. She seems to have cared about her people and her kingdom, and was willing to go to extremes to protect them.

At the end of the day though, she simply wasn't a very good ruler. If I were to ask you, what did Cleopatra actually accomplish, what would you say? Seducing two different Roman Generals? Securing the throne for herself? In the end, all she really accomplished was to grossly overplay her hand and underestimate her opponents. She was the last of her dynasty; at the end of her reign her kingdom became simply a province of a foreign Empire.She underestimated the Romans and believed that her personal charms would be a strong enough weapon in a political (and ultimately military) struggle against them. She was grossly over-matched; it's the equivalent of being offered a prize for being Mike Tyson in any contest of YOUR choosing, and picking boxing because you've been hitting the gym lately. She was able to win Marc Antony over to her side, but her influence constantly eroded his position within the Roman Republic. She had been a solid player in her own realm, but the complexities and subtleties of Roman politics completely overwhelmed her and make her efforts seem, frankly, a bit naive. Once the actual war came, things got even worse. At the Battle of Actium she panicked and fled; Antony believing she was in danger followed, and the loss of their commanders resulted in the fleet's destruction.  She pretty clearly wasn't very popular by the end of her reign; this became obvious when  her army simply deserted to Octavian in August of 30 BCE. Ultimately, she died with her kingdom in possession of her enemies, and committed suicide while a prisoner of the Romans.

What do you mean this isn't what you aspire to?!

However, I don't like having a post that's all negative. Because she is often depicted as a female role model from history, I thought I'd briefly discuss a few historical women who I do think are worthy of the distinction. This list is, of course, not even remotely comprehensive, but I do have a bit of a space limitation here. I should also point out that all of these women had flaws; they were people, and none of us are perfect. If you have your own personal historical heroine, let me know!


Æthelflæd, Lady of the Mercians

Here's a tip: If the statue of a person shows them
holding a sword, they were probably awesome.

Æthelflæd was an Anglo-Saxon, the daughter of King Alfred the Great of Wessex. She was married to the ruler of the Kingdom of Mercia during the viking invasions of England, and became in essence co ruler of that realm. While her husband was alive they seem to have worked together; he was functionally answerable to Alfred (though technically he was an independent ruler) and her good relationship with her father seems to have made her an excellent intermediary. Where she really started to shine though was after her husband's death; usually, a new ruler would have been selected at a council, but Æthelflæd was popular and Mercia granted more power to women than the other Anglo-Saxon kingdoms. She was proclaimed leader of the Mercians, and led her realm to her death. This was extremely unusual; she's the only known female ruler of an Anglo-Saxon kingdom. She established burghs (forts) throughout her kingdom after seeing how successful they had been when her father had done the same, and contributed to Mercia being the most stable realm in Britain in the viking period. She was also a war-leader; she was probably present in the field with her army on different occassions, and her strategic command saw off several enemies of Mercia, including viking armies and Welsh raiders. She died a popular queen, and her daughter succeeded her. However, Wessex soon annexed Mercia, and we are told that the deposition of their queen angered the Mercians. To understand why Æthelflæd was so amazing, you have to understand the Anglo-Saxons; they were an EXTREMELY patriarchal society. Women were of a lower social rank at every level of society, to the point that most Anglo-Saxon realms didn't even allow the wives of the king to call themselves queen. Æthelflæd isn't well-known outside of some parts of modern England, but she should be!


Tomyris, Queen of the Massagetae

Call me a cynic, but I get the feeling
that this Medieval depiction isn't a
historically accurate representation
of an ancient Indo-Iranian
warrior...

If you read my last post on the leaders in the upcoming Civilization VI video game, you are now probably somewhat familiar with Tomyris. Tomyris was the leader of the Massagetae, a group of Scythians living in modern Central Asia. All of our sources on her come from Ancient Greek historians, but these guys usually focused on other men and Tomyris is somewhat unique in being portrayed as not only a strong female ruler, but also as a strong "barbarian" (non-Greek) leader in general.  As the story went, Cyrus the Great, the founder of the Persian Empire, invaded her lands. Initially he was successful because of a trick. His army pretended to retreat, and left behind large quantities of wine. The Massagetae were unused to alcohol, and quickly became drunk upon encountering the sweet liquid. The Persians then turned and killed many of the Massagetae. The son of Tomyris was captured, and committed suicide in captivity. Tomyris challenged the Persians to battle, and this time won. In the fight Cyrus was either killed or captured, and Tomyris ordered his body decapitated. She filled a skin with human blood taken from the field, and had Cyrus' head sewn into it. Supposedly, she remarked that "I promised you that I would quench your thirst for blood, and so I have." Tomyris became something of the archetype for the powerful, barbarian warrior queen, and her legacy continues on to this day. She is frequently depicted in art, and her name is common for girls in Central Asia and Turkey. 

Eleanor of Aquitaine

Eleanor pictured here above the Rolling
Stones. 

Eleanor might be my favorite lady on this list; I've always thought if I had a daughter I'd like to name her for Eleanor. I like her so much, I found it impossible to keep my biography of her brief, and it kept growing out of control. So I'll just give you some of the highlights. From 1137 she was Duchess of Aquitaine and personally controlled one of the largest, wealthiest regions of Western Europe. She personally took the cross, and accompanied her husband (the king of France) during the Second Crusade. After divorcing the King of France, she quickly became Queen of England by marrying Henry II. She was influential while queen, and even helped her son Henry the Young King in his revolt against his father, for which she was imprisoned. When released by her son Richard I "The Lionheart," her power grew even more; she served as Regent of England when he was out of the country, including during the Third Crusade. When he was captured in Austria, she personally negotiated the terms of his release and managed to gather the funds for his ransom from a country which was already basically bankrupt. During her son John's reign she seems to have been a moderating influence, and things really didn't start to go badly downhill for him until after her death. Throughout this whole period she was also responsible for negotiating marriages between the royal family and foreign dynasties; this might sound a bit domestic, but in an era when national politics was all conducted at the personal level between nobles in meant that she was partially responsible for choosing England's political and military allies. Her courts were centers of art and entertainment, and her court in Aquitaine in particular became a center for Troubadours.  At her death she'd led an amazing life; she had been queen of two great realms, duchess in her own right to a third, a crusader, a diplomat, regent of England, and had been mother to 3 Kings, 2 Queens, a duke, a duchess, two countesses, and a count.  

Catherine the Great, Empress of Russia

And because I know you're dying to know: the horse
story is a myth spread by opponents of Catherine
after her death. It came about when servants reported
her love for fine horses and the amount of time she
spent at the royal stables. It has no basis in reality ya
weirdos! 

Catherine is one of the few female leaders in world history with "the Great" title; at the time of writing Wikipedia lists only Catherine and Tamar of Georgia as females with the title. There are a lot of myths built up around Catherine, and in a lot of ways she was similar to Cleopatra. She was considered beautiful, and was known both in her own time and today for her lovers and perceived feminine charms. Under her Russia expanded to a massive extent, and achieved military victories against several powers of the day, including Poland and the Ottoman Empire. Russia had a golden age during her rule, and became powerful and wealthy. Until the Bolshevik Revolution Russian czars attempted to emulate the success of Catherine's reign, but none succeeded. Catherine was a fine diplomat and was excellent at picking ministers and subordinates, many of whom (such as Grigory Potemkin) became famous, stellar military and political leaders in their own right. She had Alaska and parts of Central and Eastern Asia colonized and brought Russia onto the world stage in a way that it hadn't really been before her. She founded towns and cities and reformed the administration of both the state and the military. Her patronage of the arts became semi-legendary, and her love of the Enlightenment brought new scientific and artistic ideas to her country. She founded the first state institution of higher learning for girls in Europe, and the Russian nobility gained freedoms they had never before enjoyed. Her reign wasn't perfect; her policies ultimately further entrenched serfdom in Russia and increased the state's reliance on it. The lower classes were continued to be repressed, and many of Catherine's policies only benefited the nobility. This led to intermittent rebellions which began in her reign and ended with the rise of the Soviet Union. Despite this, she's often considered one of the most successful leaders in Russian history. She was so interesting, there's even a wiki article that talks about legends and myths revolving around her!

Theodora, Empress of Byzantium

I'm a little jealous of all that bling...

Maybe you like Cleopatra because you find the idea of a woman using her sexuality and charm to gain power in a male-dominated warm interesting. If that's the case, you'll be interested to know that there was another famous ancient woman known for this, but who was actually a successful ruler. In fact, she was SO successful, that she is now considered a saint! Theodora was born at the lowest rung of society; her father was a bear trainer and after his death she was forced to become an actress and prostitute. She eventually came to the attention of Justinian, the heir to the Byzantine Empire, who was so in love with her that he convinced his father to repeal a law preventing actresses from marrying into the royal family (until the modern period Actors and Actresses were considered the lowest dregs of humanity, and were socially no better than beggars and thieves). As empress Theodora was unsurpassed. In January of 532 the infamous Nika riots exploded across Constantinople, threatening to destroy the capital. Rioters proclaimed a new emperor, and the royal family and their followers were in real danger. Justinian and his advisers prepared to flee, but Theodora made a speech which shamed all of them, convincing them to stay. She knew that had they fled, their power would be gone, but if they stayed and survived they would be able to eventually re-assume control, which is exactly what happened. Justinian and many of his advisers considered her the hero of the riots, and this was true. In the aftermath of the riots the city was rebuilt bigger and better before. Theodora took an active role in government, appointing her own advisers, personally supervising imperial officials, and grooming people to take positions of power ranging from generals to simple bureaucrats. She was also, unusually for the time, active in religion. I won't get into details, but to oversimplify things there were two groups of Christians in the empire, Chalcedonians and Monophysites. Her husband and the empire at large were officially Chalcedonians, and the Monophysites were persecuted. However, Theodora herself was a Monophysite, and she was able to constantly outmaneuver both church leaders and her husband to increase the influence and standing of her religious brethren.  Her work to increase understanding between the two groups was remembered; when her husband was made a saint by the Orthodox church she received the same honor. They are both commemorated by a feast on November 14th of each year.

Hatshepsut, Pharaoh of Egypt

Lots of depictions of Hatshepsut remain, but this
one looks the most like an alien, and I think that's
pretty cool. 

Cleopatra's legacy is even less impressive when you look at another female Pharaoh, Hatshepsut. Hatshepsut is the second female pharaoh we know existed for sure; there may have been others but the records are too unreliable to be sure. Exact details of her reign are somewhat spotty (she did reign nearly 3,500 years ago) and we are even positive of the exact length of her reign, but nearly everyone agrees that she was an extremely successful monarch. She established trade networks with a number of partners, most famously the rich kingdom of Punt. We aren't sure of that kingdom's exact location, but I'm partial to the theory that it was somewhere in or near modern Somalia. Even more notable, she was an extremely prolific builder, even by ancient Egyptian standards. Her buildings rate amongst the most famous in Egypt, second only to the Great Pyramids constructed a thousand years before her reign. The Karnak temple complex was built during her reign, as were numerous other temples throughout Egypt. Her mortuary temple near the valley of the Kings is one of the most famous in the world, and it's clear that under her rule Egypt was wealthy and prosperous (it could fund these projects, after all). She was a master of propaganda, and made it clear that she was a ruler in her own right. Thanks in part to this, we know more about her reign than many of the other Pharaoh's an indirect achievement but one none the less. 

Hatshepsut's mortuary temple has served as an inspiration for architects for decades
and has appeared in media frequently. Check out any documentary on Egypt made by the History Channel and you'll spot it at least once!

This is a short list, and I could add to it near-infinitely. I've only included queens: you could add pirates, warriors, scientists, and artists to this list, but I think just looking at leaders makes the comparisons and contrasts with Cleopatra much easier. I haven't even included obvious choices, like Elizabeth I or Victoria. We are spoiled for choice when it comes to finding historical female role models, and it makes the constant emphasis on Cleopatra all the more frustrating. 

Random Facts # 5: Istanbul Was Constantinople

People who know me know that I love Istanbul. I've been to a lot of the world's great cities, and they all have their own ups and downs, but Istanbul might be the only one that feels completely unique. A question I see asked a lot is why the name of the city is Istanbul, when throughout history it was called Constantinople. The question was popularized in the 1953 song Istanbul (Not Constantinople), which asks the question throughout without answering it. The history of the song itself is kind of interesting; it was written to commemorate the 500th anniversary of the city falling to the Ottoman Turks, and has been covered by several groups (people of my generation are most familiar with the 1990 cover by They Might Be Giants).

You Guys should have asked someone!

The city has had many names in many languages. According to the Roman writer Pliny the Elder, the original settlement that sat in the current location of the city was called Lygos. The first verifiable name of the settlement, however, was Byzantion. Nobody is 100% sure where this name comes from; it's probably Thracian in origin and may have been named after a person, but apart from that we can't be sure. In Latin, the name of the settlement became "Byzantium", the name by which the settlement was known in the Roman Empire. It's from this name we get the "Byzantine Empire", and from that, the word "byzantine", meaning overly complex or archaic.

In the Third Century CE the city was involved in a rebellion, and the Roman emperor Septimius Severus had the city razed. However, its location was too strategic to abandon, and he had it rebuilt with new fortifications. He changed the name officially to Augusta Antonina in honor of his son Antonius, who confusingly became known instead by the name Caracalla after becoming emperor in his own right.   Despite the official change, the city was still probably known as Byzantion/Byzantium (depending on if a person was speaking Greek or Latin) colloquially, and shortly after Caracalla's death the town officially reverted back to its previous name.

Sorry Septimius

Until this point, the city was of a moderate size but had never been especially influential, apart from its strategic location. However, that changed with the accession to the throne of Constantine the Great. Rome had become a troublesome capital; its internal politics were a constant distraction for the ruler of a world empire, and it was geographically too distant from the rich provinces of the east and the Empire's most troublesome frontiers in Eastern Europe and on the border with Persia. Byzantium was an excellent location for a new capital for several reasons. The settlement there was minor enough to be rebuilt to the emperor's taste without being completely remote. It was highly defensible, and sat in a strategically important location between Europe and Asia and the Black Sea and Mediterranean.

At its height the city was the largest in the world

The city was rebuilt over the course of 6 years, and was consecrated and designated the new capital on May 11, 330 (the date now considered the traditional birthday of the city). Curiously, during this early period the city was referred to by several different "official" names. New Rome was probably the most common (and the one eventually adopted by the Church), but others included the unimaginative "East Rome", "Mother Rome", and "Constantine's Rome."

Constantine gives his new city to the world.... Probably not to scale

After the Emperor's death though, the city gradually became to be known simply as Constantinople (Constantine's City or the City of Constantine). Of course, this is the modern English translation of the name of the city, and its name varied by language, in Latin it was Constantinopolis and in Greek Konstantinoupolis. It would retain this name for the rest of its life under the Byzantine Empire (as well as during the period when it was controlled by the Frankish Latin Empire).

Justinian added heavily to the city's architecture
including the Hagia Sophia

In 1453 the city fell to the Ottoman Turks under Sultan Mehmed II "The Conquerer". And the Turks... kept the name. It was changed to Kostantiniyye, the name the city had had in the Turkic and Arabic speaking worlds for centuries, but meaning the same thing. This remained the official name for the city from 1453, all the way to the dissolution of the Ottoman Empire in 1923. To put in perspective how recently the city was still officially "Constantinople", here's a fun fact: this was the official name of the city the last time the Chicago Cubs won the World Series!

Istanbul during World War I

So how and when and why did the name change? Well the name "Istanbul", or at least variants of it, is actually pretty old despite its lack of official status. In Greek, there's a phrase that originally referred to various cities, στην Πόλη (To the City). This is pronounced like "Stim Boli), and overtime became contracted into a single word, basically meaning "THE City". Think of it as the way Americans often refer to New York simply as "The City" or "The Big Apple." It wasn't an official name, but it does seem to have been common in several languages, including Greek, Armenian, Arabic, and, of course, Turkish. During the Ottoman period the Turkish form of the word, İstanbul (also the modern name for the city). Yes, just in case of font issues, there is a dot over the capital I in the name of the city in the Turkish language. 

Istanbul was colloquial, but it was occasionally used "officially." For instance, the commander of the garrison for the city was known as the İstanbul ağası, or "City Chief/Lord Commander of the City". Throughout the Ottoman period the Ottomans did occasionally use this name in official capacities, but Kostantiniyye was still the official term, though often combined into long poetic descriptions for the city. The city of course had other names, such as "The Sublime Porte" (though technically this referred only to the Sultan's Palace), but Kostantiniyye was by far the most common.

When the Ottomans fell a man named Mustafa Kemal, later named Ataturk (father of the turks) became leader of the country  Okay, that's a gross oversimplification of the Turkish Revolution, but we don't have time for that here. Upon coming to power Ataturk wanted to sharply secularize and modernize his country, which had been referred to the sick man of Europe for some time and had suffered humiliating defeat after humiliating defeat. For decades up to this point, everyone in the country, regardless of ethnicity or religion, had been referring to the city as Istanbul in everyday speech. Constantinople was still used as an archaic holdover in official documents, the Ottoman postal system, etc., but nearly everyone else had dropped it. And so to simplify things, Ataturk had the name of the city officially changed. A handful of groups still used different, older names (the Greek Patriarch of the city still technically uses "New Rome"), but the Turkish government and nearly everyone else simply adopted the new name without complaint because it's what they'd been using for their entire lives anyway. 

If you're still confused, blame Ataturk

So there you have it. There's no mystery or strange answer. The city's name is just taken from "the city" and eventually became the go-to name used in everyday language. When this happened the official name was changed to fit with what everyone was already using. 

That's it for today, see you next time! 

Opinion: Civilization VI: My Thought on Firaxis' Ruler Choices

I love video games, especially ones with a historical setting. Sid Meier's Civilization series has long been considered a great way for people to get into strategy and historical video games. First released in 1991, the games are easy for casual players to pick up but are deep enough to entertain veterans. The last installment, Civ V was  developed by Firaxis and released in 2010 to wide critical acclaim and commercial success, and many people (myself included) have pumped hundreds of hours into it. The next game, Civilization VI, is being released by Firaxis in a couple of weeks and I thought I would take a few minutes to share my opinions on the leaders chosen for each Civ in the new game.

If you've never played one of these games, the concept is simple. You choose a civilization and attempt to achieve victory through military conquest, scientific achievement, or cultural dominance. Each civilization is based on one from the real world, and gets certain bonuses and traits based on their history. For example, Japan often plays as a military powerful civilization, especially in the mid-game, reflecting the dominance of the Samurai, while Egypt often gets a bonus to the construction of wonders (unique buildings such as the Pyramids which give powerful bonuses). Each Civ is also led by a historical leader who you interact with through diplomacy. These are usually famous, iconic leaders from the history of the civilization chosen both for their fame and for the fact that they are emblematic in some of their culture as a whole.

Screenshot from Civilization VI, showing a city which has constructed the Pyramids of Giza wonder.

As of right now, we have been told about 19 civs the game will launch with. Here are my thoughts on their leaders and why I like or dislike the choice. I've divided the civs into three groups. Choices I think are great overall any that I can't find serious fault with, choices that I think were bad with few redeeming qualities, and choices which I either think are good with some reservations or choices where I don't know enough about the leader's history to make a solid judgement at this point. This is based totally on my personal opinion, so let me know if you disagree with any of my thoughts!

The Good

Also, Trajan was ripped which is a nice bonus

Rome
Leader: Trajan
YES. Trajan is by far my favorite Emperor. The first history paper I ever wrote, way back in the mists of time, was a 20 page research biography of this guy. Regarded as one of the top five emperors (only Augustus is regularly ranked higher) the Roman Empire reached its greatest extent under Trajan, and no emperor after him would meet the same level of success. In character, he's also one of the most old school "Romans" of the emperors (despite being born in Spain!). He was a great military leader, but also well educated in the law and with an interest in the arts, philosophy, and architecture. Less famous to the general public than Julius Caesar or one of the "bad" emperors like Nero or Caligula, I'm glad to see Trajan getting a little love from modern pop culture. My favorite choice for a leader by far.


America

He also had a Judo gym built in the White House basement
so he had a place to beat up visitors. I'm not even making
that up!

Leader Theodore (my hero) Roosevelt
It's not Lincoln or Washington, so I'm happy. Any of you that know my love for the National Parks will understand why I like Teddy. He usually makes the top five list of greatest presidents, a fact illustrated by his inclusion on Mt. Rushmore alongside Lincoln and two of the founding fathers. He was the most quintessentially "American" president I can think of; a brave soldier, an outdoorsman and explorer, a great politician and businessman, a successful rancher and socialite. He blended as equally well with New York high society as he did with poor cowboys out on the range. His campaign platform was shockingly progressive for the time, and even today he would be considered something of a radical for his drive to constantly improve the lives of ordinary Americans while simultaneously tackling corruption and other outside influences. In many ways he was, to me at least, the most "representative' of all of our presidents, and I couldn't be happier with this choice.

Russia
Leader: Peter the Great
I love love love this choice. Peter is arguably the greatest of all of the historical Czars, and is one of the few that can probably be identified by name by a wider western audience. With that said, I wouldn't have minded if they had stuck with Catherine the Great from Civ V, but it seems that they are trying to change things up in this game so I am still a happy camper!

Besides, modern games don't feature enough Mustaches

Germany

And if you can't tell, Barbarossa was also a really nice
looking guy!

Leader: Frederick Barbarossa 
For once medieval Germany gets some love. Usually in games we get one of two German nations; the Imperial one from the Franco-Prussian War to WWI, or the Nazi one. I'm glad to see the Holy Roman Empire represented in this game. Frederick was extremely powerful in his time; his death while on the way to the Holy Land is seen by some as the beginning of the end of the chances for success during the Crusades. He's considered the greatest medieval German Emperor, and during his own time was both feared and respected by his fellow European leaders. He challenged popes, re-established the German states as a power to be reckoned with, and became a legend while still alive. A fantastic choice even if he wasn't from a grossly under-represented period of German and central European history.

Scythia
Leader: Tomyris
This is another fantastic Choice. Tomyris was a Queen of the Massagetae, a group of Scythians who resisted the expansion of the Persian Empire under Cyrus the Great. Under her leadership the Scythians not only defeated but killed Cyrus, and she was one of the few ancient female rulers spoken of with admiration by the ancient Greek historians. She's also quite probably the most famous Scythian leader by far, so that's a plus too!

This painting is titled "Tomyris Plunges the Head of the Dead Cyrus into a Vessel of Blood." She's definitely
the leader on this list that I'd be most afraid to fight!

Norway

Call me a skeptic, but I get the feeling that the historical Harald
may have been a little more frightening looking than this...

Leader: Harald Hardrada
Harald is often called the last viking king, and for good reason. In 1066 he led an invasion of England shortly before William the Bastards more famous (and more successful) attempt. Harald was killed during the invasion; at the Battle of Stamford Bridge he wore no armor, entered a berserk rage, and laid into the thick of the fighting swinging his sword two handed. Before becoming king, Harald led a true viking life too; he was a mercenary, fought in several battles, and even served as a bodyguard to the Byzantine Emperor in Constantinople. He's one of the most fondly remembered kings of Norway, and his death is often cited as the end of the viking age.

Spain

Philip also had excellent taste in his choice of codpiece and pantyhose. 

Leader: Philip II
Philip was one of the most effective leaders in Spanish history. At one point he was married to the Queen of England (Mary I) and influenced the course of two of the three great powers of Europe. During his rule Spain entered its golden age and the Spanish empire was at the peak of its power. It controlled colonies across the Americas, and its treasure fleets became legendary and inspired the first raiders to attack treasure ships igniting the Golden Age of Piracy.  He launched the Spanish Armada against England (spoiler alert: it failed miserably), and was arguably the most famous, influential monarch in his own time. After his death Spain began its slow, steady decline and the nation never really had another truly successful monarch, further cementing Philip's legacy.  Great choice.

Japan
Leader: Hojo Tokimune
While not my favorite choice, I do think this is perhaps the most interesting on the list. The obvious choices would have been Emperor Meiji or Tokugawa, but instead they chose the leader who defeated the Mongols. More well known in Japan than in the west, this guy was still extremely influential and stands as one of the greatest medieval leaders of Japan. In addition to kicking Mongol butt, he also helped to spread Zen Buddhism among the upper classes of Japanese society and helped to cement the form that the Samurai class would eventually take.

He's actually so poorly known in the west, this is the first image result
on a Goolge search of his name. No joke! 

China

Leader: Qin Shi Huang
I mean, they picked the leader the modern country is freaking named for. It can't get much more iconic than that. There are a lot of interesting and iconic leaders they could have gone for , but Qin is a really solid choice. For centuries Qin was remembered for his brutal treatment of his subjects, but in recent decades he has come to be viewed more objectively. This is in part because of Mao, who was fascinated by Qin and ordered that the history of his reign be taught in China in a positive light.  He burned books, built the terracotta army, had numerous concubines (who he had buried alive with him when he died), and his tomb remains unopened due to the pools and rivers of liquid mercury he ordered to surround his body after death. Say what you will about Qin, but the guy led an interesting life and aside from a few of the mongols, is definitely the Chinese emperor best known to us here in the west today.

The Bad

France

Because when I think of France, I think of a Florentine
banking family! 

Leader; Catherine de Medici
No no no no no no no. This is by far my least favorite choice for a leader in the game. I suspect that the developers were seeking to include more female rulers into the game, and wanted to get away from the whole Joan of Arc stereotype. With that said, it's still a bad choice. Firstly, Catherine wasn't French, she was Italian (duh). She never really ruled in her own right, though as regent for her sons during their minority she did wield a high degree of influence in the way the Kingdom was ruled, though no without opposition. She wasn't very popular during her own lifetime in France, and her legacy today continues to be mixed. My big issue here is that France has SO MANY iconic leaders; Napoleon, Louis XIV, Charlemagne (sort of), St. Louis, Philip Augustus, and so many more. Instead they chose an extremely interesting but otherwise extremely odd choice.

Egypt

Beauty is no substitute for a solid Roman legion at your side

Leader: Cleopatra
This one is nearly as bad as France in my mind. I have serious beef with Cleopatra as a historical figure, so much so that I am probably going to write a post on it in the near future. Where do I begin? Firstly, she's not Egyptian, she's Macedonian Greek. Secondly, her greatest accomplishment was getting her empire taken by a Roman teenager (the future Augustus) and his drinking buddy (Agrippa). Okay, that's a gross oversimplification, but it's also not entirely untrue. Much better choice (and to keep the gender diversity going) would have been Hatshepsut; she was and still is considered one of the greatest rulers of Ancient Egypt, but didn't get the benefit of a Shakespeare starring role or an Elizabeth Taylor film. And she was, you know, actually effective. And Egyptian.

The In-Between

Arabia

Ok, not a historical depiction, but Ghassan Massoud's
portrayal of Saladin in Ridley Scott's Kingdom of Heaven
is one of my favorite portrayals of a historical figure in a
film ever, and I'll use an image of him whenever I get
the excuse! 

Leader: Saladin
I am torn on this one. As a historical figure, I love Saladin and he's one of the most recognizable Muslim leaders in the west thanks to his part in recapturing Jerusalem from the crusaders. With that said, it's a bit of a weird choice for a couple of reasons. Firstly, Saladin wasn't an Arab; he was Kurdish. Secondly, The dynasty which he founded (the Ayyubids) didn't control more than a thin strip of coastal Arabia at his death. I think a more representative leader may have been someone like the Caliph Harun al-Rashid. He was the leader of Arabia in Civ V though, and it may be that the game's developers wished to mix things up a bit. If Saladin was instead represented as the leader of the Ayyubids instead of the more generic "Arabs" this would be one of my favorite choices.

Sumeria
Leader: Gilgamesh
Hmmm. On the one hand, he may have not existed or may be a composite character. On the other, he's the most recognizable leader of ancient Sumeria by far (again, if he existed). Most famous for his depiction in the Epic of Gilgamesh, this is (so far) the most ancient ruler in the game. In this case I'll give it a pass; we don't necessarily have a ton of reliable information on most of the leaders of Sumeria, and I like the fact that the Sumerians getting featured in a game.

The Epic of Gilgamesh

Greece 

Fun Fact: Pericles would wear his helmet tipped up on his head
like this even while in civilian clothes while walking around Athens.
This made him a target of ridicule and mockery by many in the city. 

Leader; Pericles
The beef I have here is that Pericles is a great leader for say, Athens. But all of Greece? I'm not sure what the Spartans, Corinthians, Macedonians, etc. would have had to say about that. This is a criticism I have for a few leaders on this list; the consolidation of many different cultures and civilizations into one big umbrella for the sake of simplicity. Yes, when many people think of ancient Greece they think of Athens, but I do think it is a bit of a disservice to all of the other city-states in that modern country to focus on them exclusively. I'd have liked to have seen Athens with Pericles, and then maybe Sparta with Leonidas or something similar instead.

Kongo 

I pulled this image from a site in what I presume is the Kongo language.
I can't vouch for the historical accuracy of the depiction of Alfonso here. Or if
this is even him. Google translate has failed me. But I wanted to go with
an African depiction of him, so there you go. 

Leader: Mvemba a Nzinga (Alfonso I)
I'll confess, I knew next to nothing about this guy when I saw his announcement trailer. He's definitely the leader (and the Civ) I knew the least about. Also known as Alfonso I after his conversion, he apparently led the Christianization of Kongo and attempted to modernize the Empire. I am told by people more in the know that there are potentially better leaders in terms of influence, but this guy is the one that people are most likely to know. I'm putting this one down as "ambivalent" until I have a chance to read some more!

India
Leader: Gandhi
As a historical choice, this is weird because, of course, Gandhi never "led" India. However, he's almost certainly been included because India/Gandhi have been in the Civ series since day one. In his first appearance the Gandhi AI was bugged, causing the civ to act abnormally. Hilariously, the leader known as one of the greatest representatives on non-violence was prone to launching unprovoked nuclear strikes on his neighbors and generally being extremely aggressive in the game. Because of the popularity of this disparity (even among Indian fans of the series), in sequels to the original game Gandhi was often programmed to act randomly or aggressively intentionally.  I'll give this one a pass simply for the tradition of it in Civ games. That said, I wouldn't have minded seeing some new blood. Ashoka would have been a fantastic choice!

The nuke-happy Gandhi thing quickly became one of the original gaming memes, and remains popular to this day. 

Brazil

Pedro might also win the "best beard" award in Civ Vi. It's
definitely a tossup between him and Barbarossa...

Leader; Pedro II
After Kongo, Brazil is probably the Civ that I know the least about. Under Pedro Brazil became the most wealthy, stable nation in South America and became something of a beacon of liberal ideals under his leadership. He was quite literally a genius and polymath who had interest in a number of scientific, historical, and cultural subjects. Pedro shaped Brazil to have the independent, unique culture and identity it enjoys today, distinct form Portugal or Brazil's Spanish-speaking neighbors. He's often rated as the greatest leader in Brazilian history, and I don't know enough about the subject to dispute that!


Aztecs

Montezuma depicted in an Aztec codex, created shortly after the
Spanish conquest. I have no idea what's going on in this picture
though...

Leader: Montezuma I
Not a whole lot of competition here to be honest, but still a solid choice. Montezuma essentially created the Aztec Empire and brought it to its largest extent. Unlike his more famous successor Montezuma II, he also didn't have to deal with any pesky European horses, armor, firearms, or diseases. Montezuma is one of the very few native leaders from before the European arrival in the Americas for which we have any information, and this has made him a popular topic of study dating back as far as the decades immediately after the Spanish conquest of the Aztec Empire. The only other real choice for leader here would be Montezuma II, but because he was unable to resist European aggression, his legacy and actual effectiveness as ruler are far less clear than in his ancestor's case.

England

God Save the Queen

Leader: Victoria
I both love and hate this choice. Victoria is one of the greatest monarchs in history; heck the last major "named" age bore her name, and if that's not influence, I don't know what is. My problem here is that along with the leader, many of the features of the civ in the game are from the British Empire, not just England. A simple name change to "Great Britain" or similar and I would be happy. Then they could introduce other civs for England, Scotland, Wales, etc. I know its kind of a pedantic complaint, but this IS an opinion post afterall!




And that's it! No sources today, as I don't think they're really needed. If you disagree with any of my assessments, or can think of better leaders in any of these cases, let me know!

Random Facts: The German Pirate Ship of World War I

The navies of the First World War don't get a lot of attention compared to their Second World War counterparts. In some ways this makes sense; Jutland was the only major fleet vs. fleet engagement of the war, and most of the action at sea was conducted by commerce raiders and submarines against commercial and industrial shipping. One ship of the German Empire, the SMS Emden, participated in the latter and it's one of my favorite stories of the war.

Emden

Emden was one of a number of ships constructed by the German Empire during the naval arms race that was partially responsible for the outbreak of World War I. She was laid down in Danzig in 1906 and was completed three years later. Emden was a Dresden class light cruiser, designed for long-range service in ports controlled by the young German Empire across the globe.

Commander von Müller

In 1913 Emden was put under the command of Karl von Müller who was soon promoted to the rank Emden already had a solid reputation;  she had served to bombard enemy positions during a colonial rebellion in 1911, helped protect Europeans during the Chinese Revolution in that same year, and patrolled around the Pacific. Von Müller had a similar solid reputation; he had served in Prince Heinirich of Prussia's staff and received commendations from a number of senior German military commanders, including the German grand admiral Alfred von Tirpitz. Commander von Müller fired Emden's guns in anger for the first time on August 26, 1913, when Chinese rebels attacked the ship while she was in port off the coast of Nanjing.
of Commander in the Imperial Navy.

On the outbreak of World War I Emden and her crew were the only ship in port at Tsingtao, Germany's naval headquarters in the Pacific, because the rest of the fleet was on patrol out at sea. Von Müller put to sea and on August 3, 1914 (the day after Germany declared war on Russia) he captured the Russian ship Ryazan. This was the first ship to be captured by any side during the war, and instantly made von Müller and his ship minor celebrities both back in Germany and around the world.

After the German Pacific squadron had rendezvoused, its commander Maximillian von Spee made Emden was the fastest German vessel in the Pacific, and von Spee approved of the plan. This was the last time the two naval commanders would see each other, as von Spee would be killed at the Battle of the Falkland Islands after his small squadron was annihilated by a larger British fleet only four months later.

Painting showing the destruction of SMS Scharnorst and the death of Admiral von Spee

the decision to abandon the Pacific. Japan had entered the war as an enemy to Germany, and would soon capture Tsingtao. Between the Japanese Imperial Fleet, and the British and its colonial fleets, von Spee knew that his fleet could not last long. However, von Müller requested to stay behind; this would allow Germany to sting Britain's valuable shipping in the Pacific while the rest of the fleet attempted to make a run to Germany by sailing around South America.

Commander von Müller decided that Emden would stalk the busy shipping routes between the important ports of Singapore, Colombo, and Aden to disrupt allied shipping. This mission would make Emden and her crew world famous. While navigating through the Lombok Strait in Indonesia, Emden intercepted the wireless signal from a British armored cruiser. Knowing that to be a good raider and pirate secrecy was key, von Müller ordered that a dummy smokestack be added to Emden, increasing its number of stacks from three to four. This would allow the ship to pass for a British light cruiser at a distance, which might give her time to escape if outgunned.

The tactics Emden used were simple but effective, and hearkened back to those used by buccaneers during the Golden Age of Piracy. Assisted by her fake smokestack, Emden would approach an enemy vessel with no flag raised. The other vessel would assume that the ship was British, and allow her to approach, whereupon von Müller would order the German naval ensign raised. The Germans would then broadcast a message to their prey; turn off your engines, unman your weapons, do not broadcast a radio message and prepare to be boarded.

Emden arrived in the Bay of Bengal in early September without incident; the British still believed that she was with the rest of the German squadron, and she had not been spotted thanks to von Müller's strict radio discipline and camouflage. The first ship Emden captured was a Greek collier carrying supplies for the British; amazingly the captain of the vessel agreed to enter von Müller's personal service after he offered to pay the crew! For the next month the ship stalked the waters around India, capturing 5 more ships. Von Müller transferred the prisoners from his other prizes to one of the vessels and sank the rest. After capturing a Norwegian freighter, von Müller discovered that the ship was carrying no war material and decided to let her and her crew go free. The Norwegians, astounded and grateful for this act of chivalry, warned that Emden was in danger; enemy warships were aware that a German vessel may be in the area which convinced von Müller to leave the waters he had been operating in.

Shortly after, Emden captured an Italian vessel but released it because she also wasn't carrying war material. Unlike the grateful Norwegians however, the Italians immediately contacted the British, confirming their fears of an enemy ship in their valuable colonial waters. They immediately halted all shipping off the coast of eastern India and sent six British and Japanese ships to hunt for the Emden and patrol neutral coaling stations that she was likely to use.

Commander von Müller was aware that he only had two options; continue operating in the area and pull a stunt to further humiliate the British, or flee. He chose the former, and decided to bombard the port at Madras. On September 22 he anchored 3,000 yards from the piers there and opened fire in the middle of the night. Emden fired 130 rounds in only a few minutes and escaped before the British coastal defenses could even locate the ship. Emden had managed to destroy or damage several oil tanks and sink a British merchant ship which had been at dock. The British, despite the loss to the prestige to the Royal Navy, were forced to again order a halt to shipping in the area. In less than a month Emden was responsible for the value of British exports from India to drop by over 60%, a severe blow to the economic interest of the already strained British Empire.

Oil tanks burn at the port of Madras

Into early October Emden continued to her operations, capturing or sinking several more ships. One of these, a collier, was kept and was used to support the Emden by carrying supplies. Despite these successes, the ship was running low on fuel and her crew was exhausted. von Müller decided to head for Diego Garcia, a small atoll in the middle of the Indian Ocean with a small British presence and coaling station. On arriving, and expecting a fight, von Müller discovered that the British military garrison on the island had not yet learned of the outbreak of the war due to the failure of their wireless system. Showing a level of confidence bordering on arrogance, von Müller decided to stay in the port to be treated to warm receptions by the garrison. He used this time to rest his crew, rearm, and even repaint the Emden! 

The Isolated Atoll, Diego Garcia

Emden soon returned to her duties, evading the British cruiser Hampshire by detecting the vessel's radio signals. Despite their care, the British did recapture one of the Emden's captured vessels, depriving her of a coal ship. However, von Müller was not phased, and between October 15 and October 20 captured or sunk another six enemy ships! Not wishing to tempt fate (or the British) von Müller declared his activities off the Indian coast a success and decided to move to a new hunting ground.

Zhemchug

Knowing how successful his attack on Madras had been, von Müller then decided to attack the port of Penang in British Malaya. On arriving early in the morning on October 28, Müller discovered that a russian warship, the protected cruiser Zhemchug was docked there for repairs. Zhemchug was one of the unfortunate survivors of the Second Russian Pacific Squadron which had been annihilated during the Russo-Japanese War, an incident which I talk more about here. The Russian vessel was totally helpless and Emden pulled along the Russian vessel and opened fire with torpedoes and guns at a range of only 300 yards. The Russians had time to fire only a single shot at the Emden, which missed badly, before their ship was torn apart by a massive explosion which killed 81 of her crew and injured more than 100 others. Two older French vessels which also happened to be at port opened fire, but the Emden's veteran crew easily evaded their shots. Worried that reinforcements would soon arrive, the Germans began to depart, but stopped at the mouth of the harbor to capture and sink a British freighter loaded down with ammunition. While executing this operation the French destroyer Mousquet was spotted. Her crew was confused and unsure of what was happening, and the Emden quickly opened fire and destroyed her. Instead of fleeing, von Müller stopped his vessel and rescued 36 of the French crew before continuing on their way. They were released onto a British ship which the Emden captured a few days later, after promising not to return to the war against the Germans.

This attack badly shocked the Entente powers, and caused them to halt a series of convoys which were to depart of Australia loaded with troops and war material because the British were unsure if they could protect them.

Emden then decided to travel to the major British coaling station in the Cocos Islands, hoping to destroy the wireless station there and to divert enemy ships which might be looking for him. She arrived at the station on Direction Island on November 9, and sent a landing party ashore to destroy radio tower. The locals agreed to help the party, partly because they were impressed to meet some of the crew from the now famous ship, and partly because the Germans agreed to spare a tennis court near the tower which was popular with the locals! Despite  their speed though the station was able to broadcast a distress message, which was received by the Australian light cruiser HMAS Sydney. The Australians immediately headed for the island, but thanks to a mistake in charting the enemy vessels radio transmissions, von Müller believed that they were too far away to be  a threat.

German landing party arriving on Direction Island. The ship on which they would
later make their escape can be seen in the background, with three masts. 

Sydney soon arrived on the scene, and von Müller was instantly aware that he was outgunned. Sydney's guns were far larger than his own, and if damaged could quickly return to a nearby friendly port for repairs, a luxury the Emden did not have. Forced to abandon their shore party, the Emden attempted to run, but was soon overtaken. Emden opened fire first, firing shells rapidly (she was capable of firing a salvo every ten seconds) and scoring several hits. However, they caused little damage, and when Sydney returned fire her large caliber guns were devastating. Commander von Müller made four attempts to close the range so that he could use his torpedoes, but every time the Sydney simply turned away and pummeled the Emden with her superior guns which inflicted devastating damage. An hour and forty-five minutes after the battle began, Emden ceased fire. Two of her (real) smokestacks were gone, she was riddled with holes, and dozens of her crew were dead or injured.

The Emden after being crippled fighting the Sydney

Without any other options, von Müller ran his beloved ship aground on the nearby North Keeling Island in the hopes of saving his surviving crew. The crew destroyed the remaining weapons and ammunition on board, and burned their code books so that none of it would fall into enemy hands. During the short battle the Sydney lost four crewmen and suffered minor damage, but the Emden's crew of 376 suffered 133 deaths. Von Müller and what remained of his crew were captured; most were sent to a POW camp on Malta while the injured were sent to Australia, The landing party were able to escape; they stole a British vessel from Direction Island, were able to make it to Yemen, and then made an arduous journey across the Arabian peninsula and the Ottoman Empire to Constantinople, where they were then sent on to Berlin as heroes. Commander von Müller wound up in a POW camp for officers in England, where in 1917 he led an attempted escape of 21 prisoners through an underground tunnel. A month before the war ended in 1918, he was repatriated to Germany where he was celebrated as a hero.

Commander von Müller recieved the Pour le Merite (Imperial Germany's highest honor) and was promoted to a full captain. He retired from the navy in 1919, an international celebrity and one of the few German heroes to survive the war with his reputation intact. He became a politician, and died from a bout of malaria in March, 1923.

HMAS Sydney

During and after the war Emden and her crew were celebrities. Von Müller's chivalrous treatment of enemies, including allowing all men to disembark from enemy vessels before they were sunk, made him a target of praise in both German and foreign media. Von Müller was to many's eye the last of a dead breed; a swashbuckling gentleman pirate full of bravado and charm. Unlike submarines and U-Boats, Von Müller's brazen acts were seen as those of extreme gallantry. Emden was awarded the Iron Cross, as was every member of her crew. Numerous streets and other locations in Germany were named for von Müller, the Emden, or her crew, and many of those places still retain their name to this day. Four further German naval vessels were named for Emden, and all carried a painted Iron Cross in honor of their namesake; the last of these was decommissioned in 2013. In Australia the vessel became important, as did her killer the Sydney, because this was the first operation a semi-independent Australian military conducted successfully against a foreign power. More than seven films, all produced in Australia or Germany, were created featuring the Emden, with the latest German adaptation released in 2012. In the Tamil language the ship's name (modified to Amdan) entered the language as a word for someone who is tough and sneaky, and in the Malayalam language the ward Emadan means something powerful or large.

Despite this legacy, the ship and her exploits are little known here in America, but hopefully I've changed that. If you'd like to read more about the Emden and her brave pirate crew, check out the books Gentleman of War: The Amazing Story of Commander Karl Von Muller and the SMS Emden by Dan Van Der Vat, or especially The Last Cruise of the Emden: The Amazing True WWI Story of a German Light Cruiser and Her Courageous Crew by Edwin Hoyt.

See you next time!