The Paradox of "Empire" in Age of Empires

Originally published in 2019 as part of "A Collection of Unmitigated Pedantry"

The announcement of Age of Empires 4 by Relic Entertainment sparked a wave of excitement. As someone who spent significant time with the original 1998 release (which, admittedly, reveals my age), I was thrilled. However, this news reminded me of a persistent conceptual flaw found in Age of Empires and similar strategy titles: they don't actually feature any empires.

Now, this might seem absurd. The games are teeming with Persians, Mongols, Romans, and Assyrians. How could one possibly claim these aren't empires? The distinction is subtle but vital: these games feature peoples who historically built empires, but the games themselves do not simulate the mechanics of an empire.

Defining the "Empire"

To understand why the games miss the mark, we must first establish what an empire actually is.

Definition: An empire is a political state in which a central ruling group (the core) exercises authority over and extracts resources from a periphery consisting of populations that are culturally, linguistically, ethnically, or religiously distinct from the core.

In essence, an empire is a system of resource extraction by one group from another, typically facilitated through force. This is rooted in the Latin term imperium, which translates to "command" or "control," derived from the verb imperio ("to order").

The Roman Example

In the context of Rome, imperium referred to the legal authority to command an army or preside over a court. However, the broader concept of the imperium populi Romani (the empire of the Roman people) specifically denoted the command the Senate and People of Rome held over non-Romans.

Mathematically, we can view the imperial relationship as: $\text{Empire} = \text{Core Population} \rightarrow \text{Control} \rightarrow \text{Distinct Periphery}$ Crucially, one cannot have imperium over oneself; it requires an "other" to dominate.

Common Misconceptions

Many people mistakenly believe that an empire requires a monarch. This is incorrect.

• The Roman Republic: Rome was an empire long before it had an Emperor.
• Democratic Athens: Athens transformed the Delian League into an empire (using the Greek term ἀρχή or arche) while remaining a democracy internally.
• Post-Revolutionary France: France maintained imperial holdings even after abolishing its monarchy.

While historians often use the terms "Republic" and "Empire" to describe different internal governmental structures, a state can be a republic internally while remaining an empire externally.

The Historical Norm

Since the Bronze Age, the empire has been the primary method of large-scale human organization. Our modern concept of the "nation-state" is actually a historical anomaly.

1. Consolidation: Many modern nations (e.g., Russia, China, France) are simply consolidated versions of former empires.
2. Cultural Homogenization: The state used its power to create a shared culture, which eventually made the "empire" look like a "nation."
3. The Modern Era: We are not actually in a post-imperial age. The experiences of the Chechens, Tibetans, and Uyghurs prove that imperialism persists.

Regarding the United States, one might argue it is a hegemony rather than a traditional empire, though a resident of Puerto Rico or Guam might strongly disagree. Regardless, the US has never been a traditional "nation-state" in the strict sense.

The Gameplay Gap: "Empire Building" vs. Base Building

In Age of Empires, the "empire building" loop looks like this:

while game_active:
    gather_resources(wood, food, gold, stone)
    build_structures(barracks, stables, town_center)
    train_units(villagers, soldiers)
    expand_territory()
    if encounter_enemy:
        attack_and_destroy()

This loop is fundamentally different from how actual empires function. In the game, you start with settlers and grow. You don't manage a diverse periphery; you simply destroy the opposing player's base.

Comparison: Game vs. Reality

The Imperial Flow

Conclusion

The games promise "empire building," but they deliver "city-state expansion." To truly simulate an empire, the game would need to move beyond the simple task of destroying an opponent.

Requirements for a True Imperial Sim:

• Manage distinct ethnic/cultural populations.
• Implement tribute and resource extraction systems.
• Balance core stability against periphery rebellion.
• Simulate the tension between internal governance and external domination.

Until then, we aren't playing as empires; we are just playing with very large armies.

---

Visual References:

The promise of "Empire" on the title screen.

The complex geopolitical reality of the Mediterranean.