Greetings!

Today I want to bring up some minor, but still very flavorful, changes and fixes we’ve done to a few religions. Most of what I’m about to present is the courtesy of our talented and passionate betas, who suggest a lot of good improvements!

Manichean
The Manichean religion, which in-game is part of the Zoroastrian Group and mainly present on the Steppes, has been changed to be more historical and just generally more fleshed-out. For example, rulers of the Manichean faith can no longer take concubines, can now have female temple holders and get access to Reincarnation events. The religion also receives a bunch of new goodies:

• A ‘Bema’ religious festival decision
• A formable Holy Order (The Army of Light)
• A religious head with an accompanying title (The Manichean Church)

Khurmazta
The Khurmazta religion is a new heresy in the Zoroastrian group, and is mainly present in Khiva and the new Pamir areas among the Sogdian people who live there. Rulers that adhere to the Khurmazta faith can choose to embrace a Patron Deity, who all give various bonuses much like the Hindu patron deities do.

Nestorian
The Nestorian religion, which is present in parts of Arabia, India and Africa, has also been fleshed out with new details. There is now a decision to form their Holy Order (The Order of Saint Addai) and, while not strictly relating to Nestorianism, we’ve added a new culture that is primarily Nestorian - the Assyrian culture. The Assyrian culture is present in the area around Baghdad/Syria.

General
One of the main things that caused India to be very stagnant and overly resistant to invasions was the fact that they started out with very powerful Holy Orders right out the gate. We’ve reconstructed these so that you can form them under certain circumstances, and they will automatically form when India is under threat, i.e. by letting some of the major cities fall to invaders.

Also, a lot of religions have had their Holy Sites moved around. The Indian religions, Nestorianism and Manichean in particular. They’ve primarily moved into the Purang county in Tibet, to the holy mount Kailash.

 

[Notthemama]

Not really. They get full feminism, while Fraticelli gets their own papacy and Messalians divine blood. Every heresy in the game gets one feature, but they don't need to be treated all the same. For example, Fraticelli aren't really a full heresy. They didn't have their own theology, they were just extremist Franciscan monks which got into conflict with the Church on issues like poverty. Compare that with Catharism, which was basically another religion, with dualist theology, vegetarianism, belief in reincarnation, rejection of the Old Testament... clearly, it needs more peculiar mechanics.

This is not at all in agreement with the most recent historical research on the "Cathars." First of all, they are only referred to as Cathars in the a documents written by Church officials, and there is no evidence they ever referred to themselves as such. As for saying they were "basically another religion," it is just untrue. The people of southern France definitely thought of themselves as Catholic, even if they disputed some points and were willing to burn for disagreements with the Church. The main issue, the thing that raised the hackles of the Pope, surrounded unlicensed preaching in the mode of early apostolic Christianity, which bubbled up as an issue several times, leading to the Popes co-opting some of the more friendly versions, like the Franciscans. What you have said is a very unhistorical understanding of the situation in southern France.

 

[TheAtreides84]

This is not at all in agreement with the most recent historical research on the "Cathars." First of all, they are only referred to as Cathars in the a documents written by Church officials, and there is no evidence they ever referred to themselves as such.

I know. They called themselves christians. The Good Christians. But I don't see how that would change things. Comparing what we know of their theology with the Catholic one it's clear that no conciliation is possible, they cannot both be categorized under the same religious umbrella. The disagreement is far too deep for that.

I won't get into the argument about cathar thinking being more faithful to the original nucleus of Christianity (I call them Cathars for convenience's sake, but according to me they are just true Christians), but as far as the game is concerned the difference between Cathars and Catholics is much greater than between Latin and Greek churches (or Monophysite and Nestorian churches, which are branch spawned by disagreement on Chalcedonian christology, not on the whole implant of the sacraments, cosmology, ethics, church organization, bodily resurrection and basically everything, like Catharism). This radical difference must reflected in gameplay, I think.

As for saying they were "basically another religion," it is just untrue. The people of southern France definitely thought of themselves as Catholic, even if they disputed some points and were willing to burn for disagreements with the Church.

Again, that's obvious. Nobody saw himself as a heretic. That was a derogatory brand issued by Church officials. But we are looking at it from a historical and theological point of view.

The main issue, the thing that raised the hackles of the Pope, surrounded unlicensed preaching in the mode of early apostolic Christianity, which bubbled up as an issue several times, leading to the Popes co-opting some of the more friendly versions, like the Franciscans. What you have said is a very unhistorical understanding of the situation in southern France.

I think you are conflating the general "good christian" population of Occitania, which could have been less interested in the complicated theological disputes and more concerned with issues like morality and reform of the Church, and the Perfecti, which believed in a dualistic, gnostic theology, condemned the Old Testament and rejected confession and all the sacraments in favor of the Consolamentum (actually, their feminism is very accentuated in the game, while all other differences are downplayed, and that's quite unhistorical). I suggest you to read the Book of the Two Principles, one of the few surviving works of Cathar theology.

Beside all these historical arguments, Cathars are very well known and portrayed in popular fiction, much more than other, more obscure heretical movements, and can make for a very peculiar gameplay, so they deserve to be fleshed out.

 

[Notthemama]

I know. They called themselves christians. The Good Christians. But I don't see how that would change things. Comparing what we know of their theology with the Catholic one it's clear that no conciliation is possible, they cannot both be categorized under the same religious umbrella. The disagreement is far too deep for that.

I won't get into the argument about cathar thinking being more faithful to the original nucleus of Christianity (I call them Cathars for convenience's sake, but according to me they are just true Christians), but as far as the game is concerned the difference between Cathars and Catholics is much greater than between Latin and Greek churches (or Monophysite and Nestorian churches, which are branch spawned by disagreement on Chalcedonian christology, not on the whole implant of the sacraments, cosmology, ethics, church organization, bodily resurrection and basically everything, like Catharism). This radical difference must reflected in gameplay, I think.



Again, that's obvious. Nobody saw himself as a heretic. That was a derogatory brand issued by Church officials. But we are looking at it from a historical and theological point of view.



I think you are conflating the general "good christian" population of Occitania, which could have been less interested in the complicated theological disputes and more concerned with issues like morality and reform of the Church, and the Perfecti, which believed in a dualistic, gnostic theology, condemned the Old Testament and rejected confession and all the sacraments in favor of the Consolamentum (actually, their feminism is very accentuated in the game, while all other differences are downplayed, and that's quite unhistorical). I suggest you to read the Book of the Two Principles, one of the few surviving works of Cathar theology.

Beside all these historical arguments, Cathars are very well known and portrayed in popular fiction, much more than other, more obscure heretical movements, and can make for a very peculiar gameplay, so they deserve to be fleshed out.

The book of two principles is pretty dubious as a source for "Cathar" belief. If you want to look at something from a "historical" point of view, you can't simply use "Catharism." Things which are "very well known and portrayed in popular fiction" are often terrible history. Now this could lead to a discussion of what we want the game to be about, but going by popular fiction is a really awful way to do history. If you get your history from Dan Carlin types, it is usually going to be really inaccurate history.


This is from a historian who specialize in medieval heresy and witchcraft in Occitania:

"The Cathars did not exist.

That is to say, the heretics who have come to be described as Cathars of 12-13th century never called themselves that, there is scant evidence of actual organization of these heretics of this period into anything that could be considered formal enough to have a doctrine (as opposed to Waldensians), and there is even scanter evidence that these heretics have their origins in some sort of Eastern European Manicheaism (which would have accounted for citations of Book of John).

Based recent research and analysis done by some of the pre-eminent current historians of French heresy in the high middle ages, most of our notions of a doctrine of Catharism are the result of confused historiography that has imposed Bogomilist dualist beliefs and doctrines on to the Occitan heretics.

It is only in the last 15 years that we have begun to unwind Cathar heresy from the deep confusion caused by books like Steven Runciman's The Medieval Manichee: A Study of the Christian Dualist Heresy (1947) which have assigned to so-called Cathar heresy a raft of dualist doctrines and texts which now do not adhere to Catharism under scrutiny.

The links we have between the heretics of southern France and Bogomil Manicheeism are thin, and it appears the historiography we've relied on turns on dubious evidence, the most important of which is the so-called Cathar Council, supposedly held at Saint Félix of 1167 attended by local senior heretics and - key to the connection to Eastern dualism - by the Bogomil Nicetas. Many, although not all, historians view this meeting as apocryphal, unproven, following Monique Zerner's compilation of the round table of historians discussing the matter in 2001, L'histoire du catharisme en discussion: le "concile" de Saint-Félix (1167) .

If the council were to be proven beyond doubt, we would still be a long way off from having any sense of the doctrines of the heretics, because the historiography that follows the Manichean influence of Bogomils is one of inference: because the Cathars must have had contact with Nicetas, they must therefore have taken in all doctrine of the Bogomils.

Notwithstanding this critical yet unproven connection, the rest of the evidence is bereft of details on heretical 'doctrine' of 'Cathars'. Our two other sources of information are writings by monastics, chiefly Cistercians such as Bernard of Clairvaux and Alain de Lille, and inquisition records spanning decades. The Cistercians have nothing to say about heretical doctrinal details; they invoke Manicheeism, Arianism, and Donatism in abstracted, ideological forms inherited from Augustine. There are inquisition records of Toulousain, Lauraugais, Quercy, Agenais, Aquitaine, and so forth, thousands of submissions, and none refer to these supposed dualist doctrines of Catharism.

What we do know with some certainty is that some heretics of southern France used the New Testament in parts, and they did perform certain offices but without the consistency that doctrine would require. These offices such as consolamentum, and heretical conditions such as perfected, come to us through the homogenizin effect of latin, orthodox Christian sources. We know more about the lifestyle of heretics, the bons homes or Good Men: it was Apostolic Christianity, the poor, wandering preachers at least by CE 1200."

 

[TheAtreides84]

The book of two principles is pretty dubious as a source for "Cathar" belief.

It's not like we have other sources, you know.

If you want to look at something from a "historical" point of view, you can't simply use "Catharism."

That's why I said I use it for convenience's sake. They are known as Cathars more than as "the good Christians".

Things which are "very well known and portrayed in popular fiction" are often terrible history. Now this could lead to a discussion of what we want the game to be about, but going by popular fiction is a really awful way to do history. If you get your history from Dan Carlin types, it is usually going to be really inaccurate history.

But that's not what I said. I said that their popularity warrants a good deal of attention in the game.

This is from a historian who specialize in medieval heresy and witchcraft in Occitania:

"The Cathars did not exist.

That is to say, the heretics who have come to be described as Cathars of 12-13th century never called themselves that, there is scant evidence of actual organization of these heretics of this period into anything that could be considered formal enough to have a doctrine (as opposed to Waldensians), and there is even scanter evidence that these heretics have their origins in some sort of Eastern European Manicheaism (which would have accounted for citations of Book of John).

Based recent research and analysis done by some of the pre-eminent current historians of French heresy in the high middle ages, most of our notions of a doctrine of Catharism are the result of confused historiography that has imposed Bogomilist dualist beliefs and doctrines on to the Occitan heretics.

It is only in the last 15 years that we have begun to unwind Cathar heresy from the deep confusion caused by books like Steven Runciman's The Medieval Manichee: A Study of the Christian Dualist Heresy (1947) which have assigned to so-called Cathar heresy a raft of dualist doctrines and texts which now do not adhere to Catharism under scrutiny.

The links we have between the heretics of southern France and Bogomil Manicheeism are thin, and it appears the historiography we've relied on turns on dubious evidence, the most important of which is the so-called Cathar Council, supposedly held at Saint Félix of 1167 attended by local senior heretics and - key to the connection to Eastern dualism - by the Bogomil Nicetas. Many, although not all, historians view this meeting as apocryphal, unproven, following Monique Zerner's compilation of the round table of historians discussing the matter in 2001, L'histoire du catharisme en discussion: le "concile" de Saint-Félix (1167) .

If the council were to be proven beyond doubt, we would still be a long way off from having any sense of the doctrines of the heretics, because the historiography that follows the Manichean influence of Bogomils is one of inference: because the Cathars must have had contact with Nicetas, they must therefore have taken in all doctrine of the Bogomils.

Notwithstanding this critical yet unproven connection, the rest of the evidence is bereft of details on heretical 'doctrine' of 'Cathars'. Our two other sources of information are writings by monastics, chiefly Cistercians such as Bernard of Clairvaux and Alain de Lille, and inquisition records spanning decades. The Cistercians have nothing to say about heretical doctrinal details; they invoke Manicheeism, Arianism, and Donatism in abstracted, ideological forms inherited from Augustine. There are inquisition records of Toulousain, Lauraugais, Quercy, Agenais, Aquitaine, and so forth, thousands of submissions, and none refer to these supposed dualist doctrines of Catharism.

What we do know with some certainty is that some heretics of southern France used the New Testament in parts, and they did perform certain offices but without the consistency that doctrine would require. These offices such as consolamentum, and heretical conditions such as perfected, come to us through the homogenizin effect of latin, orthodox Christian sources. We know more about the lifestyle of heretics, the bons homes or Good Men: it was Apostolic Christianity, the poor, wandering preachers at least by CE 1200."

Well, I don't really read names here. Not the historian who wrote this, nor the pre-eminent people who did "recent research and analysis". There isn't any reference in this piece. While it could be an interesting point of view, it's not mainstream established history, and the author actually admit to that. In which book can I find this?

 

[Notthemama]

It's not like we have other sources, you know.



That's why I said I use it for convenience's sake. They are known as Cathars more than as "the good Christians".



But that's not what I said. I said that their popularity warrants a good deal of attention in the game.




Well, I don't really read names here. Not the historian who wrote this, nor the pre-eminent people who did "recent research and analysis". There isn't any reference in this piece. While it could be an interesting point of view, it's not mainstream history, and the author actually admit to that. In which book can I find this?

What? It is the best current consensus of professional historians. Popular history is trash for good reason. The author is saying the old views are bad history and have been discarded by historians. You, for whatever reason, think outdated history still holds sway. It doesn't. Really, email any medievalist. They are usually quite happy to reply if you are polite.

 

[TheAtreides84]

What? It is the best current consensus of professional historians. Popular history is trash for good reason. The author is saying the old views are bad history and have been discarded by historians. You, for whatever reason, think outdated history still holds sway. It doesn't. Really, email any medievalist. They are usually quite happy to reply if you are polite.

I don't usually email people with questions. I read books. Can you link me to the ones sustaining this point of view? I would love to read some of them. After all you must have read it somewhere, in the first place.

 

[Notthemama]

I don't usually email people with questions. I read books. Can you link me to the ones sustaining this point of view? I would love to read some of them. After all you must have read it somewhere, in the first place.

Sure:

RI Moore: The War on Heresy (London, 2012)

Beverley Mayne Kienzle: Cistercians, Heresy and Crusade in Occitania, 1145–1229 (York, 2001)

Mark Pegg: A Most Holy War (New York, 2008)

 

[TheAtreides84]

Sure:

RI Moore: The War on Heresy (London, 2012)

Beverley Mayne Kienzle: Cistercians, Heresy and Crusade in Occitania, 1145–1229 (York, 2001)

Mark Pegg: A Most Holy War (New York, 2008)

Funny thing is, I searched for the words on Google and found this:

https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistori...mportant_was_the_book_of_john_the_evangelist/

A Reddit post by an anonymous author. With the exact same references you posted. Don't tell me you are actually basing this debate on Reddit.

Now, I know Cathar doctrine has been put into question for the lack of evidence (which is, from my point of view, very much to be expected), but as far as I know the debate is still on between traditionalists and skeptics, with a very recent, scholarly work like Cathars in Question (https://www.amazon.com/Cathars-Question-Heresy-Inquisition-Middle/dp/1903153689) actually acknowledging said debate as a new thing. A review of the book clearly states:

"Most of the volume's authors, however, are skeptical of the skeptic, adhering to a more "traditionalist" view of Catharism. Peter Biller critiques both Pegg and Moore, pointing out the various errors of fact and of interpretation that have led them, in his opinion, to erroneously discount the evidence for Catharism in twelfth-century Languedoc."

(https://scholarworks.iu.edu/journals/index.php/tmr/article/view/23314/29115)

Hardly the consensus you're talking about.

I can obviously be wrong, as I'm no medievalist (my degree is in modern and contemporary cultural history), but it seems to me you're not presenting very solid arguments.

 

[Notthemama]

well yes, several years ago when i first got this game I searched for resources for further reading, and idjet, who is working on his Phd, gave those recommendations. The ask historians on reddit are very good and they are all verified, so they aren't just laymen scribblers. Those books should be available at your local university library, if you live near one, which is where I was able to get them. They are all well received works of the best current history. I don't base my debate on it, those are very real books. Read them and see if you think differently.

 

[TheAtreides84]

well yes, several years ago when i first got this game I searched for resources for further reading, and idjet, who is working on his Phd, gave those recommendations. The ask historians on reddit are very good and they are all verified, so they aren't just laymen scribblers. Those books should be available at your local university library, if you live near one, which is where I was able to get them. They are all well received works of the best current history. I don't base my debate on it, those are very real books. Read them and see if you think differently.

Oh, working on a PhD... So he isn't a professional historian, he has a degree in history. Just like me.

I will surely try to get those books (but I suspect their arguments are very much the same ones discussed in Cathars in Question). That's not the issue. The issue is that you're presenting as a consensus what's in reality still a minority position among historians. These debates go on all the time. Sometime one side or the other is proven right, sometime the evidence just isn't there. But I would kindly ask you not to accuse me of not understanding history when I'm just subscribing to a traditional and still common view:

"What is to be made of all of this? As Moore acknowledges, there seems to have been agreement among the conference participants that an organized dualist heresy that we can call "Catharism" existed in thirteenth-century Languedoc and Italy. There is evidence for dualist beliefs and an organized heretical sect in the twelfth century, although the skeptics would argue that it is weak and subject to other interpretations. If the skeptics agree that Catharism existed in the thirteenth century, it would seem incumbent on them to provide an explanation of how a heresy that did not exist in the twelfth century came into full-blown existence in the thirteenth. As yet they have not done this except in the sketchiest of fashions."

 

[Five_X]

It's nice to see some smaller religions getting extra flavour! And Assyrian culture is a nice touch as well, I do hope EU4 adds something similar.

 

[Rags17]

<yawn>

 

[SigurdStormhand]

Greetings!

Today I want to bring up some minor, but still very flavorful, changes and fixes we’ve done to a few religions. Most of what I’m about to present is the courtesy of our talented and passionate betas, who suggest a lot of good improvements!

Manichean
The Manichean religion, which in-game is part of the Zoroastrian Group and mainly present on the Steppes, has been changed to be more historical and just generally more fleshed-out. For example, rulers of the Manichean faith can no longer take concubines, can now have female temple holders and get access to Reincarnation events. The religion also receives a bunch of new goodies:

• A ‘Bema’ religious festival decision
• A formable Holy Order (The Army of Light)
• A religious head with an accompanying title (The Manichean Church)

View attachment 275099

Khurmazta
The Khurmazta religion is a new heresy in the Zoroastrian group, and is mainly present in Khiva and the new Pamir areas among the Sogdian people who live there. Rulers that adhere to the Khurmazta faith can choose to embrace a Patron Deity, who all give various bonuses much like the Hindu patron deities do.
View attachment 275100

Nestorian
The Nestorian religion, which is present in parts of Arabia, India and Africa, has also been fleshed out with new details. There is now a decision to form their Holy Order (The Order of Saint Addai) and, while not strictly relating to Nestorianism, we’ve added a new culture that is primarily Nestorian - the Assyrian culture. The Assyrian culture is present in the area around Baghdad/Syria.
View attachment 275101

General
One of the main things that caused India to be very stagnant and overly resistant to invasions was the fact that they started out with very powerful Holy Orders right out the gate. We’ve reconstructed these so that you can form them under certain circumstances, and they will automatically form when India is under threat, i.e. by letting some of the major cities fall to invaders.
View attachment 275102

Also, a lot of religions have had their Holy Sites moved around. The Indian religions, Nestorianism and Manichean in particular. They’ve primarily moved into the Purang county in Tibet, to the holy mount Kailash.
View attachment 275103

If you're tweaking religions will you maybe look at how bland relations are with non-Catholic Bishops? It might be nice if you could appoint bishops as a non-Catholic King or Emperor rather than having them all just spawn, more rebellious vassal religious heads would be nice too. At the moment a vassal Popes and Patriarchs are too subservient.

I'd like to have my vassal Patriarch refuse my fourth divorce, then have the option to imprison and replace him.

Oh - and yay - Assyrians!

 

[Foreign Alien]

What kind of religion will Tibetans have? Were they Buddhists at the start of the game? How will Tibetan Buddhism be portrayed?

 

[Jia Xu]

What kind of religion will Tibetans have? Were they Buddhists at the start of the game? How will Tibetan Buddhism be portrayed?

This was covered in an earlier diary. Tibet will have Bon religion. Vajrayana Buddhism is already in the game.

 

[adityakb]

What kind of religion will Tibetans have? Were they Buddhists at the start of the game? How will Tibetan Buddhism be portrayed?

They typically followed Bon and Buddhism

 

[CatilinamSum]

What kind of religion will Tibetans have? Were they Buddhists at the start of the game? How will Tibetan Buddhism be portrayed?

Tibet in the Middle Ages was a mixture of the indigenous Bön faith (which drew heavily from Buddhism) and Buddhism.

Buddhism was an import of one of the early Tibetan emperors, Songtsen Gampo.

Historically, Tibet also had Christian and Muslim minorities.

 

[CatilinamSum]

My guess is that South and Western Slavs will share a pack.

Other pack goes to the Berber.

Still, I don't want my Tibetans (and Khitans, for that matter) to look like Mongols.

I love all portrait packs. IMO, the following packs still need to be released:

- South/West Slavic pack
- Berber/North Africa pack (perhaps accompanying a cultural diversification of the region)
- Tibetan/Khitan/Tangut pack
- Magyar pack (a man can only hope)

 

[spendabuck]

Historically, Tibet also had Christian and Muslim minorities.

Do you have sources for this? I've never heard of this before.

 

[Karlingid]

the addition of Assyrians is awesome- something I've been wanting for a very long time. However, they use Andalusi portraits- shouldn't they use Mediterranean to match the Jews? Or perhaps the Jews should be switched to Mediterranean? The point is that the two should look, in theory, quite similar to each other. Changing Jews to Andalusi portraits would also fix the problem of blatantly Christian Roman symbols appearing on Jewish characters.

If possible, I'd like to recommend perhaps having the Jews and Assyrians share a culture group (Mashriqi?) to represent their closeness in many matters. Whatever happens, though, I'm more than elated to see the Assyrians showing up.


EDIT: Remember! Assyrians use Akkadian (or Aramaicized Akkadian) names, not Aramaic! They speak Aramaic with a thick Akkadian accent and loanwords, but they mostly use Akkadian-origin names. I could provide a list, if wanted.