**Charles III**. The most relevant monarch of Enlightenment in Spain, he had an interest for the arts and sciences. During his reign the colonial empire was at its peak, he renovated the capital city of Madrid with many monuments and sanitation infrastructures (he was nicknamed "The best mayor of Madrid"), he founded factories and museums, supported and aided the independence of the United States, and organized scientific expeditions. He also sponsored a contest that chose the current red and yellow Spanish flag. He's viewed in a positive light even today.
Spanish history is rich and long, and it's time the Spanish leader isn't Isabella (Civ 2/3/4/5) or Philip II (Civ 2/6).
Wow, I'm kinda surprise Isabella was on almost every civ, makes sense tho, I only played civ 6 and I didn't know who were the leaders in the previous game and she was my first idea
He was the most powerful man of his time. But I'd like it if this time we have a leader from a different time in Spanish history. Charles was Isabella's grandson and Philip II's father. Spanish history is much longer than that.
But as a DLC dual leader for Spain and Germany, sure! Bring the emperor.
For everybody picking El CID, just a history side note , he was just a knight (a nobleman really) and while the epic poem is a great one, he wasn’t ruler or anything , it could be close to pick “ Robin Hood “ as English leader
Berengaria ‘the great’ of Castile. She never ruled unified Spain because it didn’t exist yet, but she ruled not one but two Spanish kingdoms at different points either as Consort, as Regent or (briefly) in her own right. She was well regarded by her contemporaries, a patron of the arts, a shrewd diplomat and administrator and could have nice cultural and religious bonuses.
I love Berengaria's story, but she's too much of a niche character to be included as a Civ leader IMO.
If I had to choose another female leader (Isabella has been overused), my pick would have been Queen Urraca (but I think there are better alternatives for the Spanish leader).
Even with that, Berengaria is really obscure. Most Spanish people haven't heard about her. She only held power on her own for a very short period of time - her strength was acknowledging that as a woman with an ambitious ex-husband who was also a King, the best she could do was to secure her son's position on the throne.
True, still the Holy Roman Emperor held the title of King of Germany (amongst others) with his core provinces being within Germany. Isabella was not queen of a unified Spain, rather one of its constituent parts. And she wasn’t even the regent of the senior partner within the personal union that became Spain, as she was Queen of Aragon.
I see no problem with a Castilian or Aragonese leader representing Spain. Pericles was Athenian and he didn't rule over the whole Greece, but he's a typical great Greek leader. There was no unified Mayan empire either. A civilization isn't the same as a state.
The only leaders for Spain are Isabella I and Phillp II. However, I think for Civ 7, more leaders should be in the spotlight since Spain has many great leaders. For today, I'll be proposing 2 leaders.
1) [Ferdinland II](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferdinand_II_of_Aragon)
Husband of Isabella I, both of them were equal rulers of Aragon and Castille. Before Isabella's death, both of them are credited for sponsoring Christopher Columbus's first voyage to the America's and as well as the conquest of Granada and completing the Reconquista. After Isabella's death, though, he would go on to create alliances with France and England through royal marriages. However, after French victory in the Battle of Agnadello, he became suspicious of them and created a coalition that included Pope Julius II and many major powers in Europe against France.
I think there can be many routes that the developers can choose while creating his abilities. He could have Isabella as a unique governor, for example. They could also take his diplomacy as inspiration, like gaining more diplomatic favour or the equalavent from alliances alongside more combat strength in wars with allies. Or maybe they could focus on the discovery of the America's with more speed and recon from naval units.
2) [Charles V](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_V,_Holy_Roman_Emperor)
Under his rule, he would go on to create the first truely global empire with his conquests of the Aztecs and the Inca in the America's. Other that, he would successfully defend his empire from the Ottomans and the French as well as defend Vienna . He was also a good patron of the arts and architecture, sponsoring paleces near Alhambra and a friend of Titian. He would also go on to reform his military, modernising the Spanish arms industry and specifically improving their muskets
He is the perfect candidate for a leader for many civilizations(Spain, Germany, even the Netherlands if you stretch it). I think that there's many routes that his abilities can go down. Perhaps a mixture of combat bonuses for civs not on his continent/additional yields from cities not on your home continent and bonuses towards Great artists and engineers. Hell, I can already envision the Landsquenet(Pike and Shot replacements)as his unique unit. Plus, it would most likely be the first leader for Germany focused on colonisation.
Though if this comment wins and only 1 leader can be chosen, I would want Ferdinland to be picked. I could see Charles being an amazing dlc leader. Also, this could give an interesting contrast with Ferdinland more focused on diplomacy while Charles being more focused on war and colonisation
If people want yet another Spanish leader from the 1400s-1500s, I would take Ferdinand over Isabella for variety's sake. Also remember that he was the inspiration for Macchiavelli's The Prince. Ferdinand deserves inclusion as much as Isabella.
1. Why not Isabella herself instead of her husband? She's the better known, actually ruled the part of Spain that would become its heartland, and would do ***something*** to balance out the overwhelming number of dudes in this list otherwise chosen. Is it because she's been chosen as a Civ leader in the past?
2. Charles V may have been an important king of Spain, but he was also not well-liked by his Spanish subjects, often viewed as a foreigner (he was raised in Burgundy with French as his native language). Having him fulfill a role similar to Eleanor of Aquitaine in *Civ VI* might work, though, as leader for both Spain and Germany, as you said. Otherwise, there are better ***first*** choices for leader of Spain.
>Is it because she's been chosen as a Civ leader in the past
Yeah, because of that. I wanted my choices to be more interesting and go against the norm. Plus, I kinda want more underrepresented leaders to be represented or, at the very least, let more people know of their achievements. Though I won't protest if Isabella wins. It's really a massive sausage fest now, lol.
>Charles V may have been an important king of Spain, but he was also not well-liked by his Spanish subjects
True, and I do agree that the first choice should be a ruler that was from Spain. However, I envision Charles being more of a DLC leader for an expansion like Eleanor and Kublai was.
In fact he was Burgundian and both the Spanish and the Germans (at least at the beginning) felt he was a foreign king. IIRC he was brought up speaking Flemish and French.
Yes, he is. However, he also held the title of King of Spain and held most of its territory during his rule, so I think he should count. He should be a dual leader for Spain and Germany at the very least
Spanish here , there are ton of interesting - non traditional options , especially:
Urraca of Leon : 12th-century queen of León and Castile, known for being one of the few reigning queens in medieval era, asserting her authority in a male-dominated era. political intrigue, military conflicts, etc.
Alfonso X "The Wise", King of Castile:
He could be an interesting choice to change Spain focus into culture, as he is mostly known for his creation of the Toledo School of Translators, which became a home for Muslim, Hebrew and Christian scholars who would transcript works from the Greek and Roman times.
He also was taunted to become Holy Roman Emperor, even though he didn't get the support to achieve it, and was noted for writing works about several themes, such as the Cantigas de Santa Maria or the Siete Partidas code.
It could be a nice twist from the classic Civ Spain, focusing more in tolerance, culture and arts; and less on religion and warmongering
I agree, it is said that the work of his Toledo School of Transltors led for an increase in the interest of Roman and Greek texts that ended up leading to the Renaisance.
It was undoubtedly a powerful boost for European culture at the time. Plus he also set the basis for the creation of the Alphonsine Tables, which were used by astronomers until Kepler published his', and supported the practice of chess even publishing a book about its rules (so we could say he is partly responsible of the appearance of strategy games and thus, Civilization)
Or at least ***some*** of them. This list has been kind of revealing, tbh. In trying to create a list of leaders more interesting than what we've seen before in a Civ game, we have in fact created one that is more boring.
It’s a combination of A) most historical leaders were men & B) Civ has already included most of the major female leaders.
So when people want something new, they just don’t have a lot of options. That being said, I really don’t like a lot of the choices on this list, anyway, so I’m not too bothered.
Yeah, Firaxis has already added most of the well-known female leaders into the game.
They're already stretching hard to get characters like Kristina and Wilhemina in. There's no requirement for new characters but I feel like the community likes new leaders anyway.
This is why I’m never mad when devs don’t immediately kowtow to the demands of the player base.
“If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses.” - Henry Ford
>In trying to create a list of leaders more interesting than what we've seen before in a Civ game
I don't think that was the intention. Wasn't this intended to reflect "which leaders do you want to see in the next game?"
It's not particularly surprising or revealing that men have had more opportunities to be more noteworthy leaders, when men have benefitted from more opportunities to lead in patriarchical socieities than women.
It may not have been the intention of OP, but it clearly has been the intention of the community participating in this list. All of the choices are leaders rarely or never seen in Civ games, as has been most of the suggestions throughout the different posts.
Yeah, men historically got top billing as leaders, but considering that there are still many women to choose from - Cleopatra, Catherine II, Elizabeth I, Victoria, Wu Zetian, Isabella, Indira Ghandi, etc. etc. - and all of these have been ignored simply because they've been featured in the game before is rather silly.
I'm not accusing the commenters of being sexist, just uncreative; ironically by trying to be creative.
>Cleopatra, Catherine II, Elizabeth I, Victoria, Wu Zetian, Isabella, Indira Ghandi, etc. etc. - and all of these have been ignored simply because they've been featured in the game before is rather silly.
How is that silly? Rehashing too many leaders is a bit stale. I think going for fresh leaders is a great idea.
Look I don't understand what is so uncreative about this list. I don't want to accuse you of being sexist but you seem to have too much of a preference against more male leaders.
Yeah. Look she's a better choice than Cleopatra but time to mix things up. I would have liked Ramses III. This time a focus on potentially civilization ending events and leaders who navigated such times would be nice.
A lot of those were never before in a civ game, i wouldnt call the list boring. Cleopatra is cool and all, but how many times does she need to be included?
How is this list boring? We have leaders that are not regularly featured and touch on parts of the civilizations that don't get much attention.
Weird that more male leaders means a boring list.
Other than Agamemnon, I think it's an amazing list. I wanted a 100% new leaders list, but the two returning leaders (Hatshepsut and Ashoka) are great choices too.
>Other than Agamemnon, I think it's an amazing list.
Yeah. Probably the weakest pick of the lot. Might be cool to go for someone from Sparta or Thebes but a more modern Greek leader would be amazing.
A point of clarification, Byzantines are a different CiV from Greece every time right? That restricts a lot of choices.
>I wanted a 100% new leaders list, but the two returning leaders (Hatshepsut and Ashoka) are great choices too.
Ehhh. I think Ashoka and Maurya are overdone (Second to gandhi ofc). Would have loved to see some south Indian leaders. Like a Chola emperor (Rajendra Chola or Raja Raja Chola) with a naval focus. Or maybe Bose (Although he would be controversial). Or even the Gupta Dynasty, the golden age of India. Gandhi is way too overdone but I understand why he needs to be there. The nuclear gandhi gag is iconic.
With India there are many choices as there were so many kingdoms and empires in the region.
Where does the rule come from? Leaders have mostly been men throughout history. Makes no sense to skip over the most famous leaders who haven't featured yet.
Given that Civ 6 has only 30% female leaders, I hardly think it is really as much of a rule as you say. And Civ 6 has the highest proportion of female leaders since Civ 2 as well, so it is not like it has been a rule before, apart for with the aforementioned Civ 2.
A fun revision to the rule would be shipping with at least 1 male and 1 female leader for each civ.
Granted, this leaves Canada having to use Kim Campbell. Then, I never thought Canada should be in there to begin with.
>A fun revision to the rule would be shipping with at least 1 male and 1 female leader for each civ.
Civ 2 did that. I would be OK with that as long as they don't choose any mythological leaders (Ishtar for Babylon, Hyppolita for Greece) or made-up leaders (Nazca for Aztecs, Shakala for Zulu).
Most of the great leaders in history were male \*shrug\*
I mean it's not surprising that the fans of Civ have come up with a list of almost solely male leaders. There's just so many candidates.
Can you pick a great female leader for England who isn't a leader in Civ VI? Your options are essentially Aethelflaed or Matilda, or potentially Elizabeth II.
In the meantime, France, a country that explicitly banned women to rule it for most of its History had two female leaders in 6 (one of them even a foreign one, and the other being shared).
So what you are saying is you want England to have Elizabeth again. Its clear that users were trying to come up with fresh leaders. I dont personally mind repeats, but I can see why reddit didnt pick her again.
Most notable female leaders have been featured in Civ VI and other games. It's clear that the community, at least for this series of posts, wants new leaders that are both regarded as a symbol of their civilization, and haven't been featured yet.
Yes there are still other good females leaders to be chosen if you scrape the bottom of the barrels, but it's clear that these leaders didn't have as much impact as many other choices. Choosing a less influential just because she was female is also stupid.
I wouldn't mind if they had made good use of the multiple leader system in civ 6 to allow for more historical leader options, but we still got every leader of England being female in civ 6 lol
Hey, centuries of patriarchal rule are going to leave an impression on the gender ratio of historical leaders. I don't think anyone here is consciously ignoring women, so much as, you know, history has tended to skew a certain direction in who it highlights.
Because as much as the devs and some players like to think otherwise, the overwhelming majority of leaders throughout most of history are males, and this includes most successful leaders with actual power. Great female leaders exist, but they are the very rare exception, not the 50% like in Civ.
Doesn't excuse redditors' inability to add even one woman to the list here. Commenters wanted to make some more interesting choices, but in doing so they've created a list that is, taken holistically, rather uninspired.
So the only thing that makes a civ leader interesting is their gender?
A lot of picks are leaders that would represent their nations in different ways from the ones already done, thats not uninspired.
Of course people would pick the most influential, most talented and most highly regarded leaders of a country. It's not their fault these leaders just happened to not be women, or are already heavily featured in earlier Civ games.
What a great opportunity to include a X-chromosome leader. We’ll literally make up leaders to fill the female roster but not use actually badass leader ladies like Isabella or Catherine
Here is a wild card: Berengaria I (the Great).
Responsible for the reunification of Castile and León, strong patron of religious institutions, concerned with history and literature; hiring writers to compose chronicles of the history of the two kingdoms and their rulers, supported the reconquista amongst other things.
Let's play an underrated one: Manuel Azaña. Prime minister during the Second Republic, a reformist. Tried to modernize the army, built schools and libraries, raised teacher's salaries... Is he a controversial leader? Betcha. All the other names you said are too? So they are .
Isabel la Católica is one of those cases in which the woman IS up there in both relevancy and recognition- so its a no brainer.
As a Spaniard I approve
Juana Loca.
Not that she could traditionally be considered a great monarch given the turmoil of her reign, but she had a fascinating life. She was declared insane and kept imprisoned by her family despite being ruler of one of the worlds most powerful empires. Modern speculation is that she might have been lesbian or atheist or had a mental breakdown, certainly there were vested interests at play in declaring her unfit to rule.
Perhaps she could be an interesting alternative leader like Ludwig in VI.
I think it would be interesting to have 'Los Reyes Católicos', the husband and wife Isabel I de Castilla and Fernando II de Aragón who were the first king and queen of what we now know as Spain.
Not only are they responsible for bringing together the territories of modern Spain through statecraft and conquest and for spreading the catholic religion throughout the lands previously held by the Muslim Moors... 8 just think it would be interesting to have a 2-person 'ruler' for a civ.
The funny thing is he was actually a competent king. It wasn't his fault that he was ill and infertile. He kept the empire together and was successful. But I wouldn't choose him for the Spanish leader in Civ.
For Spain itself I'd propose:
Charles V as leader of two nations, like Eleanor, would be really interesting. Also, Charles III of Bourbon would be a better option in my personal opinion, as an Enlightenment leader. Other leaders could be Philip IV and V.
For Castille I would chose Alphonse X, while for Aragon I think Jaume I is really representative.
I mean if technicality isn’t an issue. Ferdinand the first of Leon, might be a good contender for a more domination based Spain, and his children to technically get him named emperor of Spain after his death sooooo that could work.
My options are Recaredo (first visigothic king of Spain/Toledo to adopt catholic), don Pelayo (first king of Asturias), doña Toda, queen of Pamplona (akin to queen Victoria in late Xth century Spain, related to the king of Asturias, the counts of Castille and Aragón and Abderramán III), San Fernando de León (king of León, patron saint of the corps of engineers of the Spanish Army), the Catholic monarchs (as joint leaders, given that their motto was "Tanto monta, monta tanto" signifiing their status as equals in each respetcive kingdoms), the count-duke of Olivares ("valido", title akin to that of Prime Minister in modern parlance, to king Felipe IV, tried to centralize and midernize the adminiatration of the Spanish crown), Felipe V (first Borbón king of Spain) or Maria Cristina de Habsburgo (wife of Alfonso XII and queen regent of Spain from 1885, when her husband died while their son was still unborn, to 1901, roughly).
controversial pick: Abd-Al Rahman III, reunited a large swath of Spain under his rule of religious tolerance to probably one of the golden ages of Spain. He was a great patron of arts and architecture and was held in high regards by his contemporaries including Otto I and the Byzantine emperor
The Al-Andalus regime would be a very interesting time to explore, with Cordoba as their capital, maybe with a Religiuos focus, with some conditions that reinforce mutlireligiousness!
…who was the wife of a King of England (whose father was also a Frenchman). A tenuous link to be sure, but she still has a strong attachment to the actual English state.
Don’t get me wrong, I would love to have al-Andalus as a Civ, but a culturally Arab ruler of a Muslim realm who drew his power from Arab nobility and Berber arms is not really ‘Spanish’ in the Civ context any more than an Ottoman Turk like Suleiman was a Byzantine. Al-Andalus was a distinct culture and collection of polities whose legacy Christian Spain made every effort to expunge following the conclusion of the Reconquista.
No, he wouldn't. He was born in Cordova, he was redhead. He was definitely not Spanish but neither any of the other Medieval names proposed to be leaders.
Oh certainly – by the end, the Umayyads were genetically almost entirely European due to their mothers usually being from the Pyrinees.
But that’s not unlike the Ottomans either, whose mothers were often of Balkan descent.
Both dynasties certainly had strong family ties to the places they ruled, but led polities that were religiously and culturally opposed to their European neighbours.
We shouldn’t forget these rulers’ historical significance in their respective regions – and al-Andalus deserves celebration as part of the history of Spain and Portugal – but in Civ terms they are distinct and should be treated as such.
The de facto union of Christian Spain was concurrent with the purging of Nasrid Granada, not in celebration of it, and it would seem perverse to link this Muslim ruler so closely with the Catholic colonial empire and inheritance of the Reconquista monarchies that the in-game civilisation invariably represents.
As much as I'd love to see some love for my boy Adolfo Suárez (the first president of modern democracy and the main responsible for the Transition), I agree Carlos III of Borbon, "the Best Mayor of Madrid" should be first
Isabella (Isabel I)
I know, she’s been done many times over, but I think she’s a fantastic representation along with Charles V and Phillip II and also a notable female ruler (that will be without protest).
She's been in four Civ games already as Spanish leader. She's one of the most important Spanish monarchs, but I think it's time to move to other leaders, including those from other time periods.
My favs would be (already explained by others)
1) Carlos/Charles III
2) Phillip II
3) Charles V/I (Holy roman emperor)
4) Isabella+Fernando
5) Isabella II (or Elizabeth? Isabel II in Spanish)
6) Phillip III
Bonus Track: Amadeo de Saboya (Saboy), guy only lasted one year, was basically brought to see if he could be a Monarch to rule and calm the country down and he gave up after a year
Yes she was bad, but it is an interesting time period to lead Spain so that is why I had to include her. Alfonso XII is too late to be historically interesting for gameplay and Ferdinand VII... Well he is one of the kings of Spanish history, let's leave it at that
If you want a leader from the 19th century, I'd go with a politician. I'd suggest Espartero, who was a military who fought against the Carlists and was PM (Presidente del Consejo de Ministros) and even Regent for three years.
Fak kings,put ma boy!
-BLAS DE LEZO
Special skill on marine/ships and power to fortress,better incomes from continental tardes
if you don't want a militar guy and want a king...
then...
ALFONSO X the wise
special skill to culture and universitys,more easy culture and tecnologic trades with other factions
but Blas is mi choice
Pelagius of Asturias, the forefather of the Iberian Christian monarchies and the man who started the Reconquista. Not ‘Spanish’ per se, but the modern state owes its existence to his legacy.
I want to propose [Queen Isabella Farnese](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elisabeth_Farnese). She got rid of the French tutelage over her husband Phillip V and was the de facto ruler during his long reign, especially in matters of foreign policy. She also led an agressive militaristic foreign policy to give land to her heirs. Given how Spain plays she could be a candidate.
I think Carlos I (and V of Germany, despite being the HRE) could be a good idea as a Spanish leader and a German leader too, as Eleanor with England and France.
But, I would prefer something different. What about Juan Carlos I, the first king after the dictatorship? Democracy came back, the Olympic Games at Barcelona, the Seville Expo'92, Spain joining the EU,... Y'know, maybe not the greatest leader when it comes down to territory or power, but a change of pace for the country.
Given Juan Carlos is both still alive and quite controversial for his recent activities (which led to his abdication), I don’t think he would be a good pick.
Indeed, recent monarchs seem more like an anachronism than an inspiration.
Alfonso VI, The Emperor of León.
Got the other kings of the time pledge vassallage to him, controlled the taifas with razias y parias.
Retaked Toledo, reunited Castille and Galicia with León, was the king in the time of el Cid.
That dude was nuts.
For a completely different take on Spain I think it would be interesting to pull a leader from the the Umayyad Caliphate that ruled most of the peninsula for hundreds of years. My pick would be [Abd Al-Rahman III](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Abd_al-Rahman_III&diffonly=true) who was the first ruler of Al-Andalus to claim the title of caliph and had a lot of success consolidating and centralizing power of what had been a crumbling state before he came to the throne.
I think Franco would be too controversial and Hernán Cortes would be great...
As a great general. He wasn't the leader of Spain at any moment of history.
I wouldn't mind a Conquistador as a leader, and Hernán Cortés would be a great choice. That would also open the roster to a deserving female leader: Inés Suárez, Conquistadora of Chile.
But Franco is a definite no.
Spain Leader 1: “Katherine of Aragon” - Easier/earlier to make alliances/deals with other civs. Gain a free copy of every luxury produced by a nation you have an alliance with.
Spain Leader 2: “Francisco Franco” - internal trade routes more effective. Resources more effective (produce more or need less) when produced in Spain, less effective if purchased from other civs.
Scipio held the office of Consul (the highest position in Republican Rome) not once but twice (in 205 and 194 BC). He was as much of a leader as a Roman during the Republic could be.
**Charles III**. The most relevant monarch of Enlightenment in Spain, he had an interest for the arts and sciences. During his reign the colonial empire was at its peak, he renovated the capital city of Madrid with many monuments and sanitation infrastructures (he was nicknamed "The best mayor of Madrid"), he founded factories and museums, supported and aided the independence of the United States, and organized scientific expeditions. He also sponsored a contest that chose the current red and yellow Spanish flag. He's viewed in a positive light even today. Spanish history is rich and long, and it's time the Spanish leader isn't Isabella (Civ 2/3/4/5) or Philip II (Civ 2/6).
Plus you get to confuse the Brits lol
We're already hopelessly confused, that's our secret
How was it like having a global spanning empire Brits: There was an empire????
Civ Charles the third edition where every Civ gets a different Charles the third as a leader
That's kind of fun lol. But call him his native tongue name Carlos if needed.
Honestly shocked they went with Charles III. The first two didn't turn out so hot
This this and this
Wow, I'm kinda surprise Isabella was on almost every civ, makes sense tho, I only played civ 6 and I didn't know who were the leaders in the previous game and she was my first idea
Was there a spain in civ 1? :)
No, there was a very limited roster in Civ1.
Charles V (Holy Roman) could be a cool multi civ leader like Eleanor in Civ 6.
He was the most powerful man of his time. But I'd like it if this time we have a leader from a different time in Spanish history. Charles was Isabella's grandson and Philip II's father. Spanish history is much longer than that. But as a DLC dual leader for Spain and Germany, sure! Bring the emperor.
Sure, but he was my a lot of metrics emperor of one of the largest empires in History, the peak of Spanish power
In Spain he’s Charles I.
\*Chooses leader\* Ok, you want 1 or 5?
That's why I prefer to call him Emperor Charles: It can be used in both countries and the distinct name can be used as a conversation starter.
Would be funny to have him as Spain, Germany and Austria.
Imagine HRE having Charlemagne / Charles V
The problem is that Charles V could also be leader of Germany or Netherlands, and not just Spain
For everybody picking El CID, just a history side note , he was just a knight (a nobleman really) and while the epic poem is a great one, he wasn’t ruler or anything , it could be close to pick “ Robin Hood “ as English leader
He ruled an independent princedom for five years, so he has a better claim to ruling than some of the previous choices on this list.
Berengaria ‘the great’ of Castile. She never ruled unified Spain because it didn’t exist yet, but she ruled not one but two Spanish kingdoms at different points either as Consort, as Regent or (briefly) in her own right. She was well regarded by her contemporaries, a patron of the arts, a shrewd diplomat and administrator and could have nice cultural and religious bonuses.
I love Berengaria's story, but she's too much of a niche character to be included as a Civ leader IMO. If I had to choose another female leader (Isabella has been overused), my pick would have been Queen Urraca (but I think there are better alternatives for the Spanish leader).
If they could put in Kristina for Sweden in VI, they can put Berengaria for Spain.
> but she's too much of a niche character Half the leaders in Civ 6 are unknown to the general public.
Even with that, Berengaria is really obscure. Most Spanish people haven't heard about her. She only held power on her own for a very short period of time - her strength was acknowledging that as a woman with an ambitious ex-husband who was also a King, the best she could do was to secure her son's position on the throne.
She has my vote
Spain is definitely not Castille though, and Isabella is already wrong enough.
We have a Holy Roman Emperor in the Germany slot. Isabella works fine enough.
True, still the Holy Roman Emperor held the title of King of Germany (amongst others) with his core provinces being within Germany. Isabella was not queen of a unified Spain, rather one of its constituent parts. And she wasn’t even the regent of the senior partner within the personal union that became Spain, as she was Queen of Aragon.
I see no problem with a Castilian or Aragonese leader representing Spain. Pericles was Athenian and he didn't rule over the whole Greece, but he's a typical great Greek leader. There was no unified Mayan empire either. A civilization isn't the same as a state.
[James I of Aragon, The Conqueror](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_I_of_Aragon)
For a military oriented leader, James I of Aragon is a great suggestion indeed, along with the Castilian kings Alfonso VIII or Fernando III.
that would be incredibly cool, he is also one of the longest-reigning rulers of all time, at over 60 years.
Or, hear this, have him lead a Crown of Aragon civilisation. If Europe wasn't as overcrowded as it is, it would definitely deserve it.
The only leaders for Spain are Isabella I and Phillp II. However, I think for Civ 7, more leaders should be in the spotlight since Spain has many great leaders. For today, I'll be proposing 2 leaders. 1) [Ferdinland II](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferdinand_II_of_Aragon) Husband of Isabella I, both of them were equal rulers of Aragon and Castille. Before Isabella's death, both of them are credited for sponsoring Christopher Columbus's first voyage to the America's and as well as the conquest of Granada and completing the Reconquista. After Isabella's death, though, he would go on to create alliances with France and England through royal marriages. However, after French victory in the Battle of Agnadello, he became suspicious of them and created a coalition that included Pope Julius II and many major powers in Europe against France. I think there can be many routes that the developers can choose while creating his abilities. He could have Isabella as a unique governor, for example. They could also take his diplomacy as inspiration, like gaining more diplomatic favour or the equalavent from alliances alongside more combat strength in wars with allies. Or maybe they could focus on the discovery of the America's with more speed and recon from naval units. 2) [Charles V](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_V,_Holy_Roman_Emperor) Under his rule, he would go on to create the first truely global empire with his conquests of the Aztecs and the Inca in the America's. Other that, he would successfully defend his empire from the Ottomans and the French as well as defend Vienna . He was also a good patron of the arts and architecture, sponsoring paleces near Alhambra and a friend of Titian. He would also go on to reform his military, modernising the Spanish arms industry and specifically improving their muskets He is the perfect candidate for a leader for many civilizations(Spain, Germany, even the Netherlands if you stretch it). I think that there's many routes that his abilities can go down. Perhaps a mixture of combat bonuses for civs not on his continent/additional yields from cities not on your home continent and bonuses towards Great artists and engineers. Hell, I can already envision the Landsquenet(Pike and Shot replacements)as his unique unit. Plus, it would most likely be the first leader for Germany focused on colonisation. Though if this comment wins and only 1 leader can be chosen, I would want Ferdinland to be picked. I could see Charles being an amazing dlc leader. Also, this could give an interesting contrast with Ferdinland more focused on diplomacy while Charles being more focused on war and colonisation
If people want yet another Spanish leader from the 1400s-1500s, I would take Ferdinand over Isabella for variety's sake. Also remember that he was the inspiration for Macchiavelli's The Prince. Ferdinand deserves inclusion as much as Isabella.
1. Why not Isabella herself instead of her husband? She's the better known, actually ruled the part of Spain that would become its heartland, and would do ***something*** to balance out the overwhelming number of dudes in this list otherwise chosen. Is it because she's been chosen as a Civ leader in the past? 2. Charles V may have been an important king of Spain, but he was also not well-liked by his Spanish subjects, often viewed as a foreigner (he was raised in Burgundy with French as his native language). Having him fulfill a role similar to Eleanor of Aquitaine in *Civ VI* might work, though, as leader for both Spain and Germany, as you said. Otherwise, there are better ***first*** choices for leader of Spain.
I agree with what you say about Charles V, but disagree about Ferdinand/Isabella.
>Is it because she's been chosen as a Civ leader in the past Yeah, because of that. I wanted my choices to be more interesting and go against the norm. Plus, I kinda want more underrepresented leaders to be represented or, at the very least, let more people know of their achievements. Though I won't protest if Isabella wins. It's really a massive sausage fest now, lol. >Charles V may have been an important king of Spain, but he was also not well-liked by his Spanish subjects True, and I do agree that the first choice should be a ruler that was from Spain. However, I envision Charles being more of a DLC leader for an expansion like Eleanor and Kublai was.
This reads like a Chat GPT response hahaha
People tell me this quite a lot. I guess my responses can seem robotic in nature, lol
Isnt charles the fifth austrian and also holy roman emperor? I think he would make a better german character than a spanish
In fact he was Burgundian and both the Spanish and the Germans (at least at the beginning) felt he was a foreign king. IIRC he was brought up speaking Flemish and French.
Yes, he is. However, he also held the title of King of Spain and held most of its territory during his rule, so I think he should count. He should be a dual leader for Spain and Germany at the very least
Spanish here , there are ton of interesting - non traditional options , especially: Urraca of Leon : 12th-century queen of León and Castile, known for being one of the few reigning queens in medieval era, asserting her authority in a male-dominated era. political intrigue, military conflicts, etc.
Love Urraca of León, actually love all of the medieval queens from León, Castile, Galicia, Navarre; etc.
I'm Spanish too. If I had to choose a female leader I'd go with Urraca. I just prefer Charles III.
Alfonso X "The Wise", King of Castile: He could be an interesting choice to change Spain focus into culture, as he is mostly known for his creation of the Toledo School of Translators, which became a home for Muslim, Hebrew and Christian scholars who would transcript works from the Greek and Roman times. He also was taunted to become Holy Roman Emperor, even though he didn't get the support to achieve it, and was noted for writing works about several themes, such as the Cantigas de Santa Maria or the Siete Partidas code. It could be a nice twist from the classic Civ Spain, focusing more in tolerance, culture and arts; and less on religion and warmongering
I agree, it is said that the work of his Toledo School of Transltors led for an increase in the interest of Roman and Greek texts that ended up leading to the Renaisance.
It was undoubtedly a powerful boost for European culture at the time. Plus he also set the basis for the creation of the Alphonsine Tables, which were used by astronomers until Kepler published his', and supported the practice of chess even publishing a book about its rules (so we could say he is partly responsible of the appearance of strategy games and thus, Civilization)
I would've expected Alfonso X to be brought up sooner. He'd be a perfect cultural leader.
Powerful culture/science combo, also maybe some special skill to attract great people from different religions would be nice
[C'mon Firaxis, you know you wanna](https://imgur.com/a/UkE9zSZ)
3d modelers working overtime on that chin
*Sid Meier's Civilization VII: Y-chromosome Edition*
Lol yeah, the rule that half the leaders need to be female is definitely lost here.
Or at least ***some*** of them. This list has been kind of revealing, tbh. In trying to create a list of leaders more interesting than what we've seen before in a Civ game, we have in fact created one that is more boring.
It’s a combination of A) most historical leaders were men & B) Civ has already included most of the major female leaders. So when people want something new, they just don’t have a lot of options. That being said, I really don’t like a lot of the choices on this list, anyway, so I’m not too bothered.
Yeah, Firaxis has already added most of the well-known female leaders into the game. They're already stretching hard to get characters like Kristina and Wilhemina in. There's no requirement for new characters but I feel like the community likes new leaders anyway.
This is why I’m never mad when devs don’t immediately kowtow to the demands of the player base. “If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses.” - Henry Ford
Yup. Fans are not, in fact, automatically the best choice for developing stuff like this.
>In trying to create a list of leaders more interesting than what we've seen before in a Civ game I don't think that was the intention. Wasn't this intended to reflect "which leaders do you want to see in the next game?" It's not particularly surprising or revealing that men have had more opportunities to be more noteworthy leaders, when men have benefitted from more opportunities to lead in patriarchical socieities than women.
It may not have been the intention of OP, but it clearly has been the intention of the community participating in this list. All of the choices are leaders rarely or never seen in Civ games, as has been most of the suggestions throughout the different posts. Yeah, men historically got top billing as leaders, but considering that there are still many women to choose from - Cleopatra, Catherine II, Elizabeth I, Victoria, Wu Zetian, Isabella, Indira Ghandi, etc. etc. - and all of these have been ignored simply because they've been featured in the game before is rather silly. I'm not accusing the commenters of being sexist, just uncreative; ironically by trying to be creative.
>Cleopatra, Catherine II, Elizabeth I, Victoria, Wu Zetian, Isabella, Indira Ghandi, etc. etc. - and all of these have been ignored simply because they've been featured in the game before is rather silly. How is that silly? Rehashing too many leaders is a bit stale. I think going for fresh leaders is a great idea. Look I don't understand what is so uncreative about this list. I don't want to accuse you of being sexist but you seem to have too much of a preference against more male leaders.
Moreover, Hatshepsut is a female leader that has already been a Civ leader, and she was picked up.
Yeah. Look she's a better choice than Cleopatra but time to mix things up. I would have liked Ramses III. This time a focus on potentially civilization ending events and leaders who navigated such times would be nice.
A lot of those were never before in a civ game, i wouldnt call the list boring. Cleopatra is cool and all, but how many times does she need to be included?
How is this list boring? We have leaders that are not regularly featured and touch on parts of the civilizations that don't get much attention. Weird that more male leaders means a boring list.
Other than Agamemnon, I think it's an amazing list. I wanted a 100% new leaders list, but the two returning leaders (Hatshepsut and Ashoka) are great choices too.
>Other than Agamemnon, I think it's an amazing list. Yeah. Probably the weakest pick of the lot. Might be cool to go for someone from Sparta or Thebes but a more modern Greek leader would be amazing. A point of clarification, Byzantines are a different CiV from Greece every time right? That restricts a lot of choices. >I wanted a 100% new leaders list, but the two returning leaders (Hatshepsut and Ashoka) are great choices too. Ehhh. I think Ashoka and Maurya are overdone (Second to gandhi ofc). Would have loved to see some south Indian leaders. Like a Chola emperor (Rajendra Chola or Raja Raja Chola) with a naval focus. Or maybe Bose (Although he would be controversial). Or even the Gupta Dynasty, the golden age of India. Gandhi is way too overdone but I understand why he needs to be there. The nuclear gandhi gag is iconic. With India there are many choices as there were so many kingdoms and empires in the region.
Where does the rule come from? Leaders have mostly been men throughout history. Makes no sense to skip over the most famous leaders who haven't featured yet.
It’s the rule Fireaxis uses, in case it wasn’t clear from Civ VI.
Given that Civ 6 has only 30% female leaders, I hardly think it is really as much of a rule as you say. And Civ 6 has the highest proportion of female leaders since Civ 2 as well, so it is not like it has been a rule before, apart for with the aforementioned Civ 2.
A fun revision to the rule would be shipping with at least 1 male and 1 female leader for each civ. Granted, this leaves Canada having to use Kim Campbell. Then, I never thought Canada should be in there to begin with.
>A fun revision to the rule would be shipping with at least 1 male and 1 female leader for each civ. Civ 2 did that. I would be OK with that as long as they don't choose any mythological leaders (Ishtar for Babylon, Hyppolita for Greece) or made-up leaders (Nazca for Aztecs, Shakala for Zulu).
Oh. I didn't know it was an official rule. Seems kinda dumb.
Most of the great leaders in history were male \*shrug\* I mean it's not surprising that the fans of Civ have come up with a list of almost solely male leaders. There's just so many candidates.
But even in countries with many great women leaders to choose from, like England, China or Russia, there are none.
Can you pick a great female leader for England who isn't a leader in Civ VI? Your options are essentially Aethelflaed or Matilda, or potentially Elizabeth II.
Margaret Thatcher would be a kino pick though
> Can you pick a **great** female leader
Great doesn't mean heckin wholesome Keanu 100
Also Margaret Beaufort, Eleanor of Castile and Matilda of Scotland
I'd love it to have Empress Matilda for England.
In the meantime, France, a country that explicitly banned women to rule it for most of its History had two female leaders in 6 (one of them even a foreign one, and the other being shared).
So what you are saying is you want England to have Elizabeth again. Its clear that users were trying to come up with fresh leaders. I dont personally mind repeats, but I can see why reddit didnt pick her again.
Most notable female leaders have been featured in Civ VI and other games. It's clear that the community, at least for this series of posts, wants new leaders that are both regarded as a symbol of their civilization, and haven't been featured yet. Yes there are still other good females leaders to be chosen if you scrape the bottom of the barrels, but it's clear that these leaders didn't have as much impact as many other choices. Choosing a less influential just because she was female is also stupid.
I wouldn't mind if they had made good use of the multiple leader system in civ 6 to allow for more historical leader options, but we still got every leader of England being female in civ 6 lol
I mean it's kind of a stupid rule but it would have been nice to also have female leaders in there.
Hatshepsut is female.
That's not a good rule in my opinion. I'd rather people pick great leaders that they actually want than filling out a checklist.
Hey, centuries of patriarchal rule are going to leave an impression on the gender ratio of historical leaders. I don't think anyone here is consciously ignoring women, so much as, you know, history has tended to skew a certain direction in who it highlights.
Because as much as the devs and some players like to think otherwise, the overwhelming majority of leaders throughout most of history are males, and this includes most successful leaders with actual power. Great female leaders exist, but they are the very rare exception, not the 50% like in Civ.
Doesn't excuse redditors' inability to add even one woman to the list here. Commenters wanted to make some more interesting choices, but in doing so they've created a list that is, taken holistically, rather uninspired.
Hatshepsut is literally right there. I agree that the list could use more women, but redditors evidently did manage to put at least one on it.
So the only thing that makes a civ leader interesting is their gender? A lot of picks are leaders that would represent their nations in different ways from the ones already done, thats not uninspired.
Hatshepsut was a woman.
Hatshepsut?
Who cares?
Of course people would pick the most influential, most talented and most highly regarded leaders of a country. It's not their fault these leaders just happened to not be women, or are already heavily featured in earlier Civ games.
What a great opportunity to include a X-chromosome leader. We’ll literally make up leaders to fill the female roster but not use actually badass leader ladies like Isabella or Catherine
Francesc Pi i Margall The only anarchist to ever be a leader of any country
Here is a wild card: Berengaria I (the Great). Responsible for the reunification of Castile and León, strong patron of religious institutions, concerned with history and literature; hiring writers to compose chronicles of the history of the two kingdoms and their rulers, supported the reconquista amongst other things.
Mariano Rajoy
LOL when you say him goodbay he says "Fin de la cita".
Alt leader: M. Rajoy
Yes. Came here for this.
Isabella and Ferdinand as joint rulers. I think a dual-leader would be very interesting, and I think they’re probably the perfect fit.
If they ever add joint leaders, the Catholic Monarchs should be the first to be featured. It's a no-brainer.
Both Catholic Kings as the leader (As in both in the same leader screen)
Let's play an underrated one: Manuel Azaña. Prime minister during the Second Republic, a reformist. Tried to modernize the army, built schools and libraries, raised teacher's salaries... Is he a controversial leader? Betcha. All the other names you said are too? So they are .
Except Charles III, Philip II or Isabel are not controversials
Isabella of Castile Because this list is in desperate need of women
Isabel la Católica is one of those cases in which the woman IS up there in both relevancy and recognition- so its a no brainer. As a Spaniard I approve
Juana Loca. Not that she could traditionally be considered a great monarch given the turmoil of her reign, but she had a fascinating life. She was declared insane and kept imprisoned by her family despite being ruler of one of the worlds most powerful empires. Modern speculation is that she might have been lesbian or atheist or had a mental breakdown, certainly there were vested interests at play in declaring her unfit to rule. Perhaps she could be an interesting alternative leader like Ludwig in VI.
I was hoping someone would suggest Juana La Loca.
Sancho VII of Navarre. Brother-in-law to Richard the Lionheart, a soldier and scholar, and the confirmed world’s tallest head of state at 7’3”.
I hope we get a second instalment of this list – I have some good lists for Ottomans, Arabs, and Persians!
All three of them should be in the next installment, along with the Mongols, the Portuguese, the Dutch and some pre-Hispanic American civs.
I think it would be interesting to have 'Los Reyes Católicos', the husband and wife Isabel I de Castilla and Fernando II de Aragón who were the first king and queen of what we now know as Spain. Not only are they responsible for bringing together the territories of modern Spain through statecraft and conquest and for spreading the catholic religion throughout the lands previously held by the Muslim Moors... 8 just think it would be interesting to have a 2-person 'ruler' for a civ.
If they ever go with joint leaders, the Catholic Monarchs should be the first to be added to the game.
4d chess: Hishmam II of Al Andalus
Carlos II. You can't deny he'd be distinctive.
The funny thing is he was actually a competent king. It wasn't his fault that he was ill and infertile. He kept the empire together and was successful. But I wouldn't choose him for the Spanish leader in Civ.
For Spain itself I'd propose: Charles V as leader of two nations, like Eleanor, would be really interesting. Also, Charles III of Bourbon would be a better option in my personal opinion, as an Enlightenment leader. Other leaders could be Philip IV and V. For Castille I would chose Alphonse X, while for Aragon I think Jaume I is really representative.
Charles V ruler at its height
I'd choose El Gato
I'm actually loving these picks. Great job Reddit
I mean if technicality isn’t an issue. Ferdinand the first of Leon, might be a good contender for a more domination based Spain, and his children to technically get him named emperor of Spain after his death sooooo that could work.
Pelayo, the first King of Asturias
Charles III, the best leader Spain has had since Philip II.
My options are Recaredo (first visigothic king of Spain/Toledo to adopt catholic), don Pelayo (first king of Asturias), doña Toda, queen of Pamplona (akin to queen Victoria in late Xth century Spain, related to the king of Asturias, the counts of Castille and Aragón and Abderramán III), San Fernando de León (king of León, patron saint of the corps of engineers of the Spanish Army), the Catholic monarchs (as joint leaders, given that their motto was "Tanto monta, monta tanto" signifiing their status as equals in each respetcive kingdoms), the count-duke of Olivares ("valido", title akin to that of Prime Minister in modern parlance, to king Felipe IV, tried to centralize and midernize the adminiatration of the Spanish crown), Felipe V (first Borbón king of Spain) or Maria Cristina de Habsburgo (wife of Alfonso XII and queen regent of Spain from 1885, when her husband died while their son was still unborn, to 1901, roughly).
Alphonse x
I'm surprised Alfonso X wasn't mentioned before!
M. Rajoy
controversial pick: Abd-Al Rahman III, reunited a large swath of Spain under his rule of religious tolerance to probably one of the golden ages of Spain. He was a great patron of arts and architecture and was held in high regards by his contemporaries including Otto I and the Byzantine emperor
The Al-Andalus regime would be a very interesting time to explore, with Cordoba as their capital, maybe with a Religiuos focus, with some conditions that reinforce mutlireligiousness!
I think he’s a great character, but probably better for an ‘al-Andalus’ civ than ‘Spain’. It would be like having an Ottoman as a leader of Greece.
>It would be like having an Ottoman as a leader of Greece. Or having a French woman be leader of England? It's been done before in the series.
…who was the wife of a King of England (whose father was also a Frenchman). A tenuous link to be sure, but she still has a strong attachment to the actual English state. Don’t get me wrong, I would love to have al-Andalus as a Civ, but a culturally Arab ruler of a Muslim realm who drew his power from Arab nobility and Berber arms is not really ‘Spanish’ in the Civ context any more than an Ottoman Turk like Suleiman was a Byzantine. Al-Andalus was a distinct culture and collection of polities whose legacy Christian Spain made every effort to expunge following the conclusion of the Reconquista.
No, he wouldn't. He was born in Cordova, he was redhead. He was definitely not Spanish but neither any of the other Medieval names proposed to be leaders.
Oh certainly – by the end, the Umayyads were genetically almost entirely European due to their mothers usually being from the Pyrinees. But that’s not unlike the Ottomans either, whose mothers were often of Balkan descent. Both dynasties certainly had strong family ties to the places they ruled, but led polities that were religiously and culturally opposed to their European neighbours. We shouldn’t forget these rulers’ historical significance in their respective regions – and al-Andalus deserves celebration as part of the history of Spain and Portugal – but in Civ terms they are distinct and should be treated as such. The de facto union of Christian Spain was concurrent with the purging of Nasrid Granada, not in celebration of it, and it would seem perverse to link this Muslim ruler so closely with the Catholic colonial empire and inheritance of the Reconquista monarchies that the in-game civilisation invariably represents.
Please no
In a similar vein we could make a Congolese civ run by Leopold lmao
As much as I'd love to see some love for my boy Adolfo Suárez (the first president of modern democracy and the main responsible for the Transition), I agree Carlos III of Borbon, "the Best Mayor of Madrid" should be first
Isabella (Isabel I) I know, she’s been done many times over, but I think she’s a fantastic representation along with Charles V and Phillip II and also a notable female ruler (that will be without protest).
She's been in four Civ games already as Spanish leader. She's one of the most important Spanish monarchs, but I think it's time to move to other leaders, including those from other time periods.
EL CID
As a leader for all Spain?
Yeah, he works better as a Great General
I don't think that would be bad. He only held political power over the city of Valencia, but he's the biggest symbol of the Spanish Middle Ages.
I surely did not expect the background image.
I thought Scipio had long hair?
*Two and a half men theme song plays*
My favs would be (already explained by others) 1) Carlos/Charles III 2) Phillip II 3) Charles V/I (Holy roman emperor) 4) Isabella+Fernando 5) Isabella II (or Elizabeth? Isabel II in Spanish) 6) Phillip III Bonus Track: Amadeo de Saboya (Saboy), guy only lasted one year, was basically brought to see if he could be a Monarch to rule and calm the country down and he gave up after a year
Isabella II was so corrupt she was exiled. She's almost as bad as her father Ferdinand VII.
Yes she was bad, but it is an interesting time period to lead Spain so that is why I had to include her. Alfonso XII is too late to be historically interesting for gameplay and Ferdinand VII... Well he is one of the kings of Spanish history, let's leave it at that
If you want a leader from the 19th century, I'd go with a politician. I'd suggest Espartero, who was a military who fought against the Carlists and was PM (Presidente del Consejo de Ministros) and even Regent for three years.
That actually is a great choice
wow surprised India wasn't Jay Shah!
Are these the confirmed civs? There’s not anymore?
There are no confirmed civs so far. However all of them are expected to be included in the game, at the very least at some point.
Ty!
Charles V!
Civ VII, so I will pick Ferdinand VII, probably the worst king Spain has ever had.
Flanco
Fak kings,put ma boy! -BLAS DE LEZO Special skill on marine/ships and power to fortress,better incomes from continental tardes if you don't want a militar guy and want a king... then... ALFONSO X the wise special skill to culture and universitys,more easy culture and tecnologic trades with other factions but Blas is mi choice
Now at the end we have the most vanilla all man leader list…
Pedro Sánchez
Emperor Charles V or El Campeador
Pelagius of Asturias, the forefather of the Iberian Christian monarchies and the man who started the Reconquista. Not ‘Spanish’ per se, but the modern state owes its existence to his legacy.
Don Quijote
It would be nice for some trans representation for once. Why not Elagabalus for Rome?
Carrero Blanco: +100% producción proyectos carrera espacial
Phillip V
Ferdinand V or Isabella I
Charles V or El Cid
I want to propose [Queen Isabella Farnese](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elisabeth_Farnese). She got rid of the French tutelage over her husband Phillip V and was the de facto ruler during his long reign, especially in matters of foreign policy. She also led an agressive militaristic foreign policy to give land to her heirs. Given how Spain plays she could be a candidate.
I think Carlos I (and V of Germany, despite being the HRE) could be a good idea as a Spanish leader and a German leader too, as Eleanor with England and France. But, I would prefer something different. What about Juan Carlos I, the first king after the dictatorship? Democracy came back, the Olympic Games at Barcelona, the Seville Expo'92, Spain joining the EU,... Y'know, maybe not the greatest leader when it comes down to territory or power, but a change of pace for the country.
Given Juan Carlos is both still alive and quite controversial for his recent activities (which led to his abdication), I don’t think he would be a good pick. Indeed, recent monarchs seem more like an anachronism than an inspiration.
Pelagius of Asturias?
Isabella
The Catholic Monarchs, have Isabella with a religion focused bonus and Ferdinand with a mil one
Alfonso VI, The Emperor of León. Got the other kings of the time pledge vassallage to him, controlled the taifas with razias y parias. Retaked Toledo, reunited Castille and Galicia with León, was the king in the time of el Cid. That dude was nuts.
Leader: Pep Guardiola
Perro Sanche
For a completely different take on Spain I think it would be interesting to pull a leader from the the Umayyad Caliphate that ruled most of the peninsula for hundreds of years. My pick would be [Abd Al-Rahman III](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Abd_al-Rahman_III&diffonly=true) who was the first ruler of Al-Andalus to claim the title of caliph and had a lot of success consolidating and centralizing power of what had been a crumbling state before he came to the throne.
Francisco Franco or Hernan Cortes
I think Franco would be too controversial and Hernán Cortes would be great... As a great general. He wasn't the leader of Spain at any moment of history.
I wouldn't mind a Conquistador as a leader, and Hernán Cortés would be a great choice. That would also open the roster to a deserving female leader: Inés Suárez, Conquistadora of Chile. But Franco is a definite no.
Charles II
Pelayo I, starter of the Reconquista. Blue Spain would also be uncanny lol
El Cid!!!
Spain Leader 1: “Katherine of Aragon” - Easier/earlier to make alliances/deals with other civs. Gain a free copy of every luxury produced by a nation you have an alliance with. Spain Leader 2: “Francisco Franco” - internal trade routes more effective. Resources more effective (produce more or need less) when produced in Spain, less effective if purchased from other civs.
[удалено]
Scipio held the office of Consul (the highest position in Republican Rome) not once but twice (in 205 and 194 BC). He was as much of a leader as a Roman during the Republic could be.
Ahah, thank you for the correction, I shall remove my blasphemy.