Tinto Maps #10 - 12th of July 2024 - Syrian Levant & Egypt

[Kvesir]

Also, I'd like to appeal to the devs to NOT call the culture of Middle Eastern Jews "Mizrahi". "Mizrahi" is a colloquial term that was formed in the modern State of Israel to refer to Middle Eastern Jewish migrants - it was originally an exonyom (it is how Ashkenazis referred to any Middle Easterner without understanding their cultural differences) and it did not exist before the modern period. It literally means "Easterner" (or "Oriental").

A better term for the pre-Sefardic Jews in the Middle East would be "Musta'arabi" - roughly meaning "those who live among the Arabs". Musta'arabs maintained their cultural differences from the Sefardics when those arrived and in some cased they had different synagogues. This is similar to how the pre-Sefardic Jewish culture in the Greek world would be "Romaniote".

 

[Wixelt]

What are the woods on the edge of the Syrian desert?

 

[nyetflix2]

Now that I think about it, I'm not sure I like the existence of an Alawite culture. They speak Shami Arabic like their Sunni neighbors (with a distinctive accent, true, but there are several different accents within Shami), and afaik they spoke Arabic back in 1337 too. The special characteristic of Alawites is really their religion, not their culture. I mean at that point, why isn't there also a Druze culture?

 

[Pescavelho]

where is the merenites in lebanon

They're depicted as Catholic Levantines, not a separate religion or culture.
"Levantine" at this time actually refers to Catholics, albeit Western Catholics of European extraction, mostly descended from traders and crusaders.

Also, I'd like to appeal to the devs to NOT call the culture of Middle Eastern Jews "Mizrahi". "Mizrahi" is a colloquial term that was formed in the modern State of Israel to refer to Middle Eastern Jewish migrants - it was originally an exonyom (it is how Ashkenazis referred to any Middle Easterner without understanding their cultural differences) and it did not exist before the modern period. It literally means "Easterner" (or "Oriental").

A better term for the pre-Sefardic Jews in the Middle East would be "Musta'arabi" - roughly meaning "those who live among the Arabs". Musta'arabs maintained their cultural differences from the Sefardics when those arrived and in some cased they had different synagogues. This is similar to how the pre-Sefardic Jewish culture in the Greek world would be "Romaniote".

"Mizrachi" is indeed a bit of an overinclusive neologism, but I don't mind its use here, especially when you have other terms like "Eastern Berber" as a single culture. The other option would be splitting Mizrachi into 5 or even more different cultures, and the Jewish group already has a lot of granularity.

Now that I think about it, I'm not sure I like the existence of an Alawite culture. They speak Shami Arabic like their Sunni neighbors (with a distinctive accent, true, but there are several different accents within Shami), and afaik they spoke Arabic back in 1337 too. The special characteristic of Alawites is really their religion, not their culture. I mean at that point, why isn't there also a Druze culture?

I think it'd be more appropriate as a religion yeah. They said they'll depict the different Shia sects as an internal mechanic, why can't Nusayrites be represented like that?

 

[BootlegMorso8]

First off, I want to say that I appreciate your games and they have helped me shape my views on history

I will talk mainly about Arabia because that’s the region I am most familiar with.

I am confused why there is a differentiation between Bedouin and Hijazi or Najdi, being Bedouin is just a lifestyle, you can be both Bedouin and Hijazi or Bedouin and Najdi, almost all Arabians live a Bedouin lifestyle. If you still want to make northern Hijaz a different culture (although I don’t see enough differences to make a new culture) calling it Shamali would be better because it’s the current name used for the tribes in the north.
Minor nitpick; Hijaz is the name of the strip of mountains between Najd and the western coast Tihama where Makkah is.

I’m pretty sure the Sharifate of Makkah and Madinah should be vassals of the Mamluks, as they were the rulers until the dissolution of the ottomans.

Idk if you’ve finished the whole Arabian peninsula but the population in Hijaz seems lower than expected, the tax records of the Arab caliphates indicates that Arabia as a whole had 1.5-2 million people, and after the unification of Saudi Arabia it had approximately 2 million pops, in Hijaz it had approximately 1 million and another 1 million in the rest areas of Saudi Arabia, so it should be between those numbers.

Regarding the raw materials, it’s a bummer not seeing camels as they were and to some extent still are one of the most important assets in Arabia, not only for their meat and milk but also for transportation and a lot of wars were fought on their backs.

Also I agree with some comments that said that some of the mountains of Arabia should be impassable, as some reach the height of 3000 meters.

 

[Cephei80]

Here you are:
View attachment 1162447

hmmm there is an issue with this .
many of the names are post 47
places like "hebron" were known for 700 years up to the start date as "Al-Khalil"
Sidon is classical age but its real name since it stopped being greek was "ṣaydā"
Acre since the 600s was "Akka"
Jerusalem is " Al-Quds" since the arabs took it in 600s to this day
i mean i am saying this because i see half well written but half are either post 47 or just western exonyms . its not consistent .
if its Arab controlled area then make them all homogenistic instead of using 3 ways of naming cities . modern , local and exonym.

 

[za3tarani]

It appears that Yazidism/Sharfadin started/revived around 12th century in Kurdistan (northern Iraq) by Sheikh 'Adi ibn Musafir with earlier roots going back to Zoroastrianism. It's not entirely Islamic either as it incorporates heavily from pre-Islamic traditions of the Yazidi, so I wouldn't entirely consider it as just a Islamic movement and considering it's probable Iranian pre-Zoroastrian roots, it'll be more of an Iranian than Abrahamic religion.

History of Yazidi on JSTOR
The Yezidis: The History of a Community, Culture and Religion

yeh i know, i didnt say it was entirely a islamic movement. many of the areas "conquered" by islam coped by calling themselves muslims and appeared muslim outward but still practiced their pre-islamic customs, and many mixed different beliefs, including from christianity.

i just abit unsure when yazidism started as an organized religion, and your source seems to claim 12th century, and i am unsure about it, but maybe.

edit: btw, the zoroastrian link is denied by yazidi religious leaders afaik - but im sure they, like other iranic religions/sects today (like yarsanism/kaka'i) have old iranic practices - this seems likely atleast.

 

[Woeskies]

Another thing that has not been quite addressed re Armenian Cilicia, it is far too Armenian. Based on the map it seems like majority Armenian, when in reality the Armenians were a ruling caste, albeit they were the biggest single population group. I don't have academic access anymore, but I recall in the The Armenian Kingdom in Cilicia during the Crusades that there are some statistics that could give you a rough estimate.

 

[za3tarani]

Yazidism and Kurdish Presence in the Medieval Period - Brief Response

This is a very brief overview. I am planning a longer post about Kurdish and Yazidi presence in Anatolia, Levant, Armenia and Iraq. I find them along with the Druze to be a fascinating group. So just expect their to be a longer more thoroughly cited post coming.

i will be reading it when you do.

According to Michael M. Gunther the record of the term Kurd or Yazidi has no record until the 7th century, and the term exists as an exonym from the Muslim conquest and Islamification to describe the native Mesopotamians. As a result, the existence of the Kurds not just on assumption but on archaeological evidence can date back to 4000 years. Its just that the term Kurd or Yazidi has been forced upon them as an exonym, Kurd likely coming from the term Kurt. This is further supported by academics like John S. Guests and Eszter Spät who came to the same conclusion and is now the consensus starting point when analysing the Kurds and Yazidis.

im not sure i understand this. most of mesopotamia spoke aramaic when muslims conquered it from persians, and did so some hundreds of years after as well (including the muslim converts), with some speaking arabic and ofc iranic language in the zagros areas. if the term kurd didnt exist on record before 7th century how is there archaeological evidence from 4000 years ago?

If you want evidence of their existence going back this far the first persecution we know of occurred under eighth Abbasid Caliph al-Mu’tasim Bi’llah in the north of Mosul, which resulted in a revolt by Yazidi leader Mir Jafar bin Mir Hasan Dasni in 838 (Manucharyan, 2015) and a more recent one to the start date was carried out by a Mosul ruler, Badr al-Din Lu’lu, in 1254, and in 1415 we know the Adawis (a sect of Yezidism) were further persecuted and killed. (Kreyenbroek and Rashow, 2005).

what is your source that Mir Jafar was yazidi?

Due to their traditional cultural background, coincidences in their socio-religious rituals and resemblance between the name Yazidi and an infamous and controversial Muslim caliph Yazid ibn Mu’awiya, also known as Yazid-l, of the Umayyad caliphate, people confuse Yazidis with Muslims and followers of Yazid. However, they are not Muslims, Christians or Jews, nor do they have any connection with Yazid. Which is why many Muslims portray them as Devil Worshippers or Corrupted Muslims. In fact Yazidism is likely from a similar branch of religious origin as Zoroastrianism, although unique in itself. (Izady, 2015)

right, today there is a common misconception that yazidis follow Yazid-l, but i didnt say it was. and yes, today yazidism is an independent religion - never said anything about that either. however, how it started as a religion is still debated - some of its folloers even claim it is 7000 years old or something. it seems most likely (atleast what i believe) it started as an ofshoot of islam, and started incorporating influences from other religions/practices. there is and were many such movements in the levant, mesopotamia and easter anatolia, and some survived until today.

In terms of where they were most dominant. We know that historical places like Lalish (the holiest site) and when Saladin conquered Antakya in the end of the 12th Century there were the dominant group (likely plurality not majority). We also know their continued resistance all the way through Ottoman rule in places like the Sinjar Mountains which was hard to control. In addition the Malkishi of Çemişgezek and the Malikan of Hisyn Kayfa remained as separate enclaves organised in their own traditional social-structures and rarely integrated into the nomadic confederations of the 15thC. The necessity of Aqquyunlu recognition of Kurdish autonomy was integral to the maintenance of the trade routes and seasonal migrations and would be further strengthened with the marriage of Uzun Hasan’s eldest son to the Malkishi chief in 1459. They also had significant presence along the route between and in the towns of Diyarbakır and Mardin. Their continued autonomy and key presence along trade routes allowed Kudish/Yazidi to rapidly expand in the 14-15th centuries especially when the wider Muslim Turco-Iranian power was deteriorating and would be a key component in the rise of the Safavid state.

I could go on. I am preparing a long post about Kurdish and Yazidi groups with academic referencing. Historiographicaly there isn’t much work out there on medieval analysis. Most academic work has been on the 20th Century. Although there has been an uptick over the past 10 years on more medieval and early modern studies.

tag when you do post that. i myself am interested in kurdish history and the many different ethnic/religous groups developed there - as i myself am from such background.

I am away from my main notes. So excuse the lack of proper MHRA referencing and just some name drops of historians. But I highly recommend this article


Sara Nur Yildiz, Post-Mongol Pastoral Policies in Eastern Anatolia during the Late Middle Ages, Publications de l'Institut Français d'Études Anatoliennes (2012), 27-48

do you have a link to that paper?

 

[aperson456]

The inconsistency with Arabic bothers me a bit. Where is the line between an adapted and unadapted loanword? Why's it "Shia Islam" and not "Šīʿa Islām" but "Mamlūk" and not "Mameluke"?

I didn't even notice Mamlūk, thanks for pointing that out. However, I think that the English word for it is simply Mamluk, without the accent. I don't think I've ever seen it spelled Mameluk before. Both EU4 and the Wikipedia article for them simply spells it as Mamluk.

 

[Vispian]

it seems most likely (atleast what i believe) it started as an ofshoot of islam, and started incorporating influences from other religions/practices. there is and were many such movements in the levant, mesopotamia and easter anatolia, and some survived until today.

Expect the longer post probably middle to end of next week. Got my own academics thesis stuff to do as well

You should be able to find the bottom paper free online, last i checked. Forgive im not gonna continue to respond to each section of your comment ill include it in my longer post as it might be a good structure to address certain points.

Just wanted to make a quick comment, I think its a more generally accepted that the Yazidis likely adapted islamic customs on top of their religion then the opposite of adopting other religious customs on top of Islam. They have very few religious similarities to Islam, outside of some cultural practices. Also if you want to get nitty gritty there are many different types of Yazidis. Alevi, Adawis, etc. The aspect of the revival of the 12th Century seems to have been a kind of religious reformation of the older more "decentralised" old iranic (i.e. Zoroastrian rooted) religions that were still widely practiced in the region. This is why Yazidis claim to have a long heritage and why archaeological evidence at least supports this in that the old iranic religions the Yazidis grew out of existed before Islam in the region. You are correct in your characterisation this was largely due to the weird religious experimentation and mixing of the time, but that doesnt mean all were Islamic rooted. Sure Islam had an influence on the development of Yazidis but to call it the root, is like calling Islam a root religion from Judaism. There is evidence of its influence, but Islam mostly grew out of the pre-islamic Arabic religions with some Abrahamic influence.

 

[Woeskies]

A good source on the Alawites and their population would also be A History of the ‘Alawis: From Medieval Aleppo to the Turkish Republic, as it exiswts right now, I doubt the (then) recent Alawite immigrants from Sinjar are depicted, and there isnt a strong costal mountain distinction in the provinces, when at the time the Alawites mostly populated the mountains and only migrated to the costal plains following the Ottoman conquests. Although it should be noted that maybe you can depict them as a mostly tribal population if you are not going to further subdivide the costal mountains from the costal plains?

Another interesting thing would be to add mosques in all the Alawite provinces at game start, since the Mamelukes had implemented a policy that forced the Alawite villages to build mosques in their villages.

 

[Friedrich von Deutschland]

Cyrenaica should be split into at least two provinces. One for the eastern portion now in Egypt, and another for the western part now in Lybia. A single province representing an entire region is odd and beyond that it’s such a stretched province as to be unusual. Ten locations is a lot more than most provinces get.

 

[ArVass]

I'm also not entirely certain about the specific mechanics assigned to provinces and areas and what do they change, like, in the West provinces seem to be structured more like counties/county level administrative entities with their sizes and low location count, but then some areas have some insanely massive provinces closer in size and spread to general historical regions and what would be a "duchy" in CK or even a "state" in EUIV, and Areas in the west are more like "duchy-level" regions and subdivisions while in the East in cases such as the Levant their scope is closer to multi-country geopolitical areas. Often the two different "approaches" are found together in the same generic region, such as in Anatolia or as we have seen the Levant.

Pavía, can we know what's mostly the specific role/design approach for these levels of regionality? And what's the reason for seeming inconsistencies?

I fucked up the ping, @Pavía, could you give us some short explanation of what exactly Provinces and Areas supposed to be and how are they treated in game terms? So that we would know more about the specific gameplay associations with them before suggesting changes.
Currently we only know the approximate size and population of them by region, but I am very curious about what exactly they do in gameplay terms. Eg, if controlling an entirety of an area grants some bonus for example, then small areas like Wales for example are disproportionally easier to control entirely than a massive one like the Levant, with like 59 locations under it, which might be a problem

 

[I_have_no_ideas_for_name]

I didnt like Mamluks own half of eastern bit of Sahara like Modern day it only become a thing after the khedivate of Egypt I think, but there is that border in 1337 :d
View attachment 1162791
Maybe make these isolated parts uncolonized did Mamluks really controlled Saharan tribes? Or maybe make these Colonial wastelands require all of adjacent locations in order to be colored or restrict it to Age of Revolutions or Absolutism etc

Yeah, I went on a mini Wikipedia rabbithole out of curiosity about this and although the History sections for most East Saharan oases is very scarce it seems to imply that between Ancient Egyptian and Ottoman times these oases were not subject to any foreign nation. Maybe it would be more accurate to portray them in game as one-province-minors ruled by local tribal leaders. Or, indeed, just uncolonized provinces, since they don't seem to have been very geopolitically active.

 

[TalusOfDixie]

We don't know exactly when Coptic died as a spoken language. For this reason, you can't really use it to describe only un-Arabized Copts. Either you use it to represent all Copts or get rid of it as a culture and represent Copts as just Upper/Lower Egyptians with Miaphysite religion, the former seems to be what Tinto went for.

That's kind of the point, though. Using it to represent all Copts creates inherent problems when actually playing out the game, we may not know exactly when Coptic died as a spoken language, but we know when it was living, and it was at the game's start-date. Of course, that means that the extension of Coptic culture would become something of a (bigger, because anyway pops are educated guesses) guess, but not exactly a difficult one to work out – Take the current Miaphysite pops, pick those at the rural parts of Lower Egypt, and most of those at Upper Egypt, and you have a reasonable take on what it would roughly look like.

Most importantly to my point, however, is that doing what i said:

The point is that, the whole "well, what happens to a Coptic pop that converts to Islam?" (Or vice-versa) conundrum can be solved by reframing what the game represents by the Coptic culture itself. It can work like that: "Coptic" pops represent people that, beyond everything, still speak Coptic colloquially, and sure, by game-start, all Coptic pops are Miaphysite, but not all (well, maybe not even most) Miaphysite pops are Coptic, with already-Arabized – but still Christian – populations, being represented by Masri/Sa'idi pops that are of Miaphysite faith. I don't know how that could be modelled in-game, but something that makes it more likely for a Coptic pop convert to the surrounding Arabic equivalent BEFORE that pop converting religions should be sufficient (and, i guess, much easier than simply modelling actual ethnoreligiosity) for it to model not only the historical decline of the Coptic language in-game (PC in a 1800 start-date would have no Coptic culture pops, but still a relevant amount of Miaphysite Egyptian pops) vis-a-vis the non-conversion of Copts to Islam, but also if implemented elsewhere could allow events like the historical Arabization of Sudan, the Turkification of some christian populations under Ottoman rule and many other particular cases to play out historically if enough conditions were met!

Makes it so that the game portrays things better at a gaming level, and can be applied more generally for more accurate representation of other, similar situations. The only requirement for that to work is that Coptic speakers exist in 1337, and we know that they do, and they kept existing at least for the next four hundred years. It has been mentioned that they would be a minority of the Myaphisites, and i mean, probably (But considering how Lower Egypt/Cairo Copts got a harsh hand under the last century Mamluk rule, the proportion gap is most likely balanced by the amount of Arabized Copts that were persecuted out of Christianity), it still would be a sizable enough community to be portrayed in-game, and it would make the game work better in game terms, which i think it's way more important when dealing with this situation.

In the way that things are now, a Coptic culture pop converts to Islam while you play, and you simply may go ?????? and feel that it's gamey, because well, aren't Copts supposed to be Christian? It icks out immersion. But in a situation where the culture and the religion are clearly divided, things would make more sense: A Coptic culture pop converting to Islam is simply a Coptic-speaking Muslim, just as a Egyptian culture pop that is Christian is simply a Arabic-speaking Copt, or Melkite (there's also this, in current terms, "Coptic" culture is integrating the Orthodox christians, which shouldn't be the case).

Anyway, as i said, the current state is OK in accuracy terms, the problem is the stated conceptualization issues around ethnoreligious groups in a game where culture and religion aren't intrinsically related for pops.

 

[FleetingRain]

I don't know a lick of Arabic but the Barqa province annoyed me so much I had to take a look at Wikipedia and check western Egypt.

Spoiler: rambling

From what I understand, the province of Barqa should stop at Tobruk; Sallum should either be entirely given to Egypt (following modern borders) or split in half (Sallum to the west and I-have-no-idea-how-to-name-this to the east). Similarly, the westernmost bit of Alexandria should be separated and turned into a new location, maybe El Hamam. Then you take Matruh, El Hamam, and "east Sallum" to form a new 3-location province, maybe called Matruh/Baritun. It turns out Sallum and El Hamam would be way too small for the current Egypt map however, specially considering they're sparsely-populated locations, so you'd need to redraw Matruh too.

An alternative for the province would be taking these three locations plus Alexandria and form an Alexandria province. My justification for this is, I swear to god, a Reddit thread: there's this OC map by redditor Redeyedtreefrog2, showing all the aamal, nawahi and vassal states of the Mamluk Sultanate. Regarding his sources,

"the two main sources are Ibn Mamati's "Qawanin Al Dawawin" (قوانين الدواوين) written in 1176 AD in the salihid rouk under Mamluk sultan Salah Al Din Al Ayyubi (or simply Saladin). The second is "Al tuhfa Al saniyya fi asma'a Al bilad Al misriya" (التحفة السنية بأسماء البلاد المصرية) written by Ibn Al Jay'an in 1315 regarding the Nasirid Rouk under sultan Al Nasir Mohammed Ibn Qalawun.

He mentions in that map that, according to Ibn Al-Jay'an, the entire Mediterranean Coast from Alexandria to Barca was under the Alexandria nawahi. I cannot check for myself because it's in Arabic, but any speakers could take a look at Ibn Al-Jay'an's book, available online in Internet Archive.

Unfortunately, this would make the area province a bit awkward, with either Lower Egypt extending all the way to Libya, or Alexandria not being part of Lower Egypt.

Then, looking at the oases... I think the Siwa location is a *bit* too big, and the map makes no mention of Al Jaghbub. The Rabyanah/Mwzy oasis should probably also be there, between Tazirbu and Al Jawf. Awjila might be too big and both Awjila and Maradah may be too much to the south, and I kinda doubt there was a connection between Siwa and Al Jawf? To this day there isn't, and why wouldn't you take a path through Awjila instead?

So, with all these changes, this is how the those locations would look like (I used this tool for the transliterations):

Someone with more free time than me should look into the Cairo area (the lower half should be part of Upper Egypt) and whatever the hell is going on south of El Qoseir by the Red Sea.

 

[BurnBird]

It's honestly amazing to me how many people are complaining about how the names "should" be something different, when dynamic names is a planned, yet unfinished feature.

Has no one read any of the previous tinto map posts? How many of the posts here are just less than useless posts of people saying "Jerusalem should be Al-Quds and Hebron should be Al-Khalil"

You are genuinely drowning out actually useful comments with this spam.

 

[Pescavelho]

It's honestly amazing to me how many people are complaining about how the names "should" be something different, when dynamic names is a planned, yet unfinished feature.

Has no one read any of the previous tinto map posts? How many of the posts here are just less than useless posts of people saying "Jerusalem should be Al-Quds and Hebron should be Al-Khalil"

You are genuinely drowning out actually useful comments with this spam.

This is one of the reasons I try to include many points in my posts (that aren't just quotes, like this one). I'm always afraid of pointing out something that has already been pointed out, so I make several points to try and minimize wasted pixels, since at least one of my thoughts ought to be original.

 

[marwanrashad]

Thank you for the names and thank you very much for this very detailed Tinto talk on one of the more controversial regions. Great work on the cultures and religions. While I still need some time to look into the sources (e.g. Ibn Mammati) to get a better view of the Egyptian locations in that time, I already have a few suggestions.

1- Naming inconsistencies
a) El/Al inconsistency
In Egyptian Arabic, the definite article is EL, never Al. You have this correctly in the names of the locations El Mahalla, El Burullus, El Bahnasa, El Qasr, El Arish, El Qoseir, and El Tor as well as the province of El Minya. You however used the standard Arabic variety "Al" in some other location names for no apparent historical, regional, or linguistic reason. For example, the locations Al Buwit, Al-Balyana, Al Jundi, and the provinces Al Buhayra, Al Gharbiyya, Ash Sharqiya, and Al Jifar. Here I would recommend using the Egyptian Arabic variant of El, since these are Egyptian location names.

b) The hyphen after El/Al
Al-Balyana has a hyphen after the definite article. I suggest removing the hyphen and going with El Balyana.

c) Inconsistencies in the use of the definite article in location and province names.
Why is it El Bahnasa and Al Jifar but Faiyum and Tih, rather than El Faiyum and El Tih? There is no reason to choose one over the other, as both have the El in their Egyptian Arabic names. Some other names that should have El in their names drop it, such as El Bahariyya (meaning the northern [oasis]) drops to Bahariya. In another case, you have the location as Minya but the province as El Minya. My suggestion is to keep the El in the localization to Arabic-speaking ruling countries like with Welsh names and remove it for English and other Western languages since the definite article in the location name doesn't make sense in most place names in those languages (The London?). An Egyptian when switching to English will intuitively drop the El from the location names. "I went to Bahnasa" sounds more natural than "I went to El Bahnasa". Also, the official English names of modern Egyptian governorates drop the El. For example, what you have as Ash-Sharqiyya province is officially Sharqiya Governorate. I don't know about other varieties of Arabic, Egyptian Arabic is my native language. Another option is to just add El everywhere, but then you will have to add it to a few more location names.

d) Al Sharqiyya vs Ash-Sharqiyya
Do you want to go down the rabbit hole of Arabic sun and moon letters? Again I suggest dropping the article altogether.

e) Y-consonant gemination inconsistensies
Ash-Sharqiyya vs Bahariya .. pick one. In both standard and Egyptian Arabic, the Y is geminated and pronounced Sharqiyya and Bahariyya.

f) Egyptian Localization
Saint Anthony is Anba Antonios, Saint Katherine is Sant Katrin, Ras Gharib is Ras Ghareb, Hauf Ramsis is Hof Ramsis. Al Buhaira is El Beheira.

If you also need Coptic localization for the location names for some alternate history Coptic cultural revival plays, I am sure there are many Egyptians who can help you with that, including me.

2- Regions/Provinces Divisions
a) Upper and Lower Egypt
- Minya/ El Minya is definitely Upper Egypt, not Lower Egypt.
- Red Sea Cost has more cultural ties to Upper Egypt not Lower Egypt (check geography section).

b) Alexandria
- Alexandria was never part of "Al Buhayra/El Beheira", nor did it have many cultural or linguistic ties with it. II quickly checked Mamluk and Fatimid sources and this simply never happened.
- Matruh and Sallum were never under the administration of Cyranaeca/Barqa for any significant period of time.
The only division that makes sense here would be to remove Alexandria from "Al Buhayra/El Beheira" and create a new province including Alexandria, Matruh and Sallum, and call it Alexandria. Long Alexandria > Long Barqa, having basically Libya snake all the way to the edge of the Nile Delta doesn't make any sense.

3- Geography
You are missing two desert/mountain passes between Upper Egypt and the Red Sea. from Tabnah to Ras Ghareb and from Sharuna or Atfih to Saint Anthony. Mining and trading campaigns since ancient times have crossed from Upper Egypt through the wadis of the eastern desert to the Red Sea, not all the way north to the delta then to Suez, and finally down the coast.


4- Cultures
I know you based the names Egyptian, Sa'idi, and Coptic on the English Wikipedia names of the languages/dialects spoken by these groups, which is fine. But may I suggest that you change Egyptian and Sa'idi to Lower Egyptian and Upper Egyptian? Sa'idi literally means upper, referring to Upper Egypt, and while it is almost never used in modern times, Upper Egyptians aka "Sa'idis" would refer to Lower Egyptians as Bahrawy (Northerner). During Mamluk/Ottoman rule and until the monarchy was abolished what you call Egyptian was referred to historically as Fellah (pl. Fellahin literally meaning peasant), but you don't call it Bahrawy or Fellahin culture, you call it Egyptian as if it were the default culture. The cultural and linguistic divide between the two cultures clearly follows the geographical divide between Upper and Lower Egypt and predates the Arab conquest. It has existed from pre-dynastic through Coptic Egypt to the present time. Picking one as the de facto standard Egyptian is quite biased in my opinion, and I am not from Upper Egypt, by the way.

5- Resources
Sinai is probably named after the mineral turquoise because of the abundance of turquoise mines there. I don't think turquoise is a resource in the game, but maybe dyes instead of stone next to the copper province in South Sinai could be a good addition.


Overall you have the best most accurate representation of Egypt in any video game ever and I can't praise you enough for that. I know for a fact that you based this on solid sources. Thank you for your work.

Update
Also referring to the post by FleetingRain that I can't quote without being flagged as spam.

​

1) Alexandria/Barqa Situation
I know Arabic and have looked into Al tuhfa Al saniyya fi asma'a Al bilad Al misriya" (التحفة السنية بأسماء البلاد المصرية) written by Ibn Al Jay'an in 1315. On page 138 it says that Alexandria (Nawahy and Thaghr, which means dependencies and port city) starts at the Great Barrier and ends at Barqa. But I can't tell from the names of the villages exactly where they think Barqa starts. I agree with you, as I also mentioned in my post, that Alexandria to Sallum should be a new province called Alexandria.

2) Geography
Siwa is missing a corridor to Matruh