Tinto Maps #18 - 13th of September 2024 - Persia & Caucasus

[SuperLexxe]

thanks a lot, maybe you could link the other source here. I don't think my university access would work, but worth trying anyways

An Ethnohistorical Dictionary of the Russian and Soviet Empires (1994)

And this is the source for the 15th century claim:
https://arhiiv.eki.ee/books/redbook/didos.shtml

 

[Georgian Noble]

An Ethnohistorical Dictionary of the Russian and Soviet Empires (1994)

And this is the source for the 15th century claim:
https://arhiiv.eki.ee/books/redbook/didos.shtml

nah, sadly not working.

 

[Ispil]

As expected, putting "didoi" into a search engine does not get you the results you were hoping for.

 

[Deutscher Kaiser]

Iran should maybe have some more spices (saffron) and sugar going on. Although it imported most of both spices and sugar from India (Matthee, Rudolph. The Safavid World, section on economy), it has remained from ancient times to this day the primary saffron producer of the middle east. I couldn't find references on regional distribution, in antiquity there was some production in Isfahan, Derbent and Khorasan (Willard, P. Secrets of Saffron, 2002, p. 2). In modern Iran, the main focus of saffron production seem to be located in Khorasan and Fars.

Edit: I had overlooked some of the spice ressources, apologies. You might give it another look, but it's probably fine as ist is.

For sugar production, I can reference this map. It is a reproduction of a map found in Watson, Andrew. Agricultural innovation in the early Islamic world. Cambridge University Press. p. 16.

 

[Deutscher Kaiser]

Please also review the population of Herat. Lawrence Potter writes about Herat under the Kartids:

we conclude that in times of prosperity Herat city contained 45,500 to 60,000 people, Herat velāyat 140,000 to 160,000, and the Herat quarter of Khorāsān 300,000 to 400,000. At the time of the later Karts these numbers would have been much reduced, and I suggest figures of 25,000, 60,000, and 130,000 for the city, velāyat, and quarter, respectively.

Potter, Lawrence. “The Kart Dynasty of Herat: Religion and Politics in Medieval Iran.” Ph.D. diss., Columbia University, 1992.

I quoted this from Mahendrarajah, Shivan. A History of Herat: From Chingiz Khan to Tamerlane. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2022. P. 336. Mahendraj also writes repeatedly that the population increased majorly between the Mongols and Timur, though he doesn't present an estimate of his own. On page 323 he also writes that according to Rashid ad Din, saffron, mulberries and cotton were the cash crops of the Herat area. Herat itself was an important centre for finished products.

 

[ValhallArchitect]

40-30 ships is pretty substantial by eu4 standards. Especially since this represents a significant chunk of the Russian navy. Clearly, OTL Russia thought it was worth it to have a large fraction of their naval capacity devoted to the Volga-Caspian, even if you don't. I think I will take their word over yours.

This kind of problem already exists in the game since it's the same thing as Egypt having to decide whether to build ships in the Mediterranean or Red Sea. And we already have mostly landlocked countries that can build fleets that don't really need them. In eu4, fleets are dirt cheap to maintain so it doesn't really matter, but I'm not sure how it will work in eu5.

Not to the same extent. Egypt in early game has this issue, but later once the Cape is rounded, it’s capable of sending its Mediterranean ships to the Red Sea (though with a long detour, thus making it strategic to build the suez canal which was envisioned from the antiquity)

I do understand the logic applies similarly though… for Russia. I can understand the reasoning, but one concerns till remains to be solved (although it can with good AI coding).
Central Asian nations HAVE to prioritize land military over sea investment, as their biggest war threat is essentially terrestrial

 

[systemlvl]

So I finally got around to doing some GIS analysis with the wastelands, mostly of Iran. Overall I think my conclusion is that they are well placed, but could do with minor adjustments, especially in northern part and I dispute the need for the one in the Birjand-Quen area to exist at all.

Working with the ESRI:54016 Gall Stereographic projection is kind of a nightmare in terms of time spent georeferencing with most data, and not all raster maps have good enough references (the Caspian Sea is often not transparent) to be reliable. So assume all maps are EPSG:4326 - WGS 84 unless explicitly stated to be Gall-Peters using the "[Galls]" marker.

The Anthromes 1300 AD layer (from HYDE 3.3) comes in three flavors: Baseline, lower and upper scenarios, where lower and upper model more or less (respectively) human influence on land use.

Spoiler: Ahthromes 1300 AD HYDE 3.3

History Database of the Global Environment 3.3 - Data Publication platform of Utrecht University

Data Publication platform of Utrecht University

public.yoda.uu.nl

My biggest takeaway here is not actually about Iran, but that Turkmenistan and the area to the east of Urgench could do with a little less wasteland, representing shrublands and previously irrigated land.

For a more precise picture there is the 2021 ESA Worldcover map, with the huge caveat that it does obviously show modern land use [Galls].

Spoiler: 2021 ESA Worldcover

ESA WorldCover 2021

ESA WorldCover 2021 global land cover product at 10 m resolution. Considering the heavy download of the WorldCover map at 10m, a web interface was developed to mainly visualize and interact with data.

worldcover2021.esa.int

From this, the wastelands are almost perfectly placed, except that odd one to the East around Birjand-Quen where there is plenty of settlement.

Next, the UN GAEZ Land and Water Ressources Sub-theme map "Soil and terrain suitability - rain fed - low input" gives an indication of the innate fertility and usability of the soil for agriculture.

Spoiler: Soil and terrain suitability - rain fed - low input

Theme Details - Theme 1

This Data Portal is used for the dissemination, visualization and access to GAEZ v4 data.

gaez.fao.org

If this map is to be assumed to be accurate, there could be made minor reductions to the Lut wasteland to the south-west and a similar thing with the Kavir wasteland to the north-east.

In the same vein, Humdata.org has a map of populated places (cities, towns, villages, hamlets, etc.), which overlap quite nicely with the wastelands, except for the one again in the Birjand-Qaen area (not marked in this map) and some small settlements like Reshm in the Semnan area (northern Kavir wasteland).

Spoiler: Populated Places

Iran Populated Places (OpenStreetMap Export) | Humanitarian Dataset | HDX

This theme includes all OpenStreetMap features in this area matching ( Learn what tags means [here](https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tags) ) : tags['place'] IN ('isolated_dwelling', 'town', 'village', 'hamlet', 'city') OR tags['landuse'] IN ('residential') Features may have these...

data.humdata.org

Moving on to water. Humdata.org has a map of waterways/flows, which again also corresponds nicely to the wastelands except for the Birjand one.

Spoiler: Waterways

Iran Waterways (OpenStreetMap Export) | Humanitarian Dataset | HDX

This theme includes all OpenStreetMap features in this area matching ( Learn what tags means [here](https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tags) ) : tags['waterway'] IS NOT NULL OR tags['water'] IS NOT NULL OR tags['natural'] IN ('water','wetland','bay') Features may have these attributes: -...

data.humdata.org

From "Groundwater Ressources of the World", we can get a big-picture overview of the major groundwater aquifers in Iran. My main note here is the northeastern part of Kavir which has very high recharge (although accessing, saving and storing the water in the Iranian climate is its own topic) [Galls].

Spoiler: Groundwater resources and recharge

BGR - WHYMAP - Groundwater Resources of the World

Groundwater Resources of the World

www.whymap.org

Apropos Climate, here is the 1901-1930 Köppen–Geiger climate classification map zoomed in on Iran.

Spoiler: Climate

Köppen - GloH2O

The latest version (V2) of the maps can be downloaded here. IMPORTANT: This archive includes GeoTIFFs of Köppen-Geiger maps in varying resolutions for

www.gloh2o.org

Where the climates of note are:

BWh = Arid, desert, hot
BWk = Arid, desert, cold
BSk = Arid, steppe, cold

It is an interesting map in other ways, but doesn't really give in any new insights into the drawn wastelands beyond them being cold or hot deserts.


And rounding it all of with surface geology [Galls].

Spoiler: Surificial Geology

I found this legend in another map USGS made of Iran, and the designations seem to be similar, but I don't think all the types are covered. Please completely ignore the color system.

Surficial geology of Iran (geo2cg)

The geology data set for this map includes arcs, polygons, and labels that outline and describe the general geologic age and type of bedrock of Iran. The geologic provinces data set includes arcs, polygons, and labels of geologic and petroleum provinces interpreted and designated by R.M...

www.sciencebase.gov

Of note are the following types in different areas

Spoiler: Rock and landscape formations

Kavir:

N

Qsk - Quaternary sabkha/marsh

Q - Quaternary

Qe - Quaternary eolian


Less - K - Cretaceous


Lut:

Q - Quaternary

N - Neogene

TV - Tertiary volcanics

J - Jurassic


Others:

Q - Quaternary

Overall the "TV" areas formed by (relatively recent, in geologic terms) volcanic activity in the Lut wasteland should definitely stay, and similarly with the majority of the "Qsk" salt marshes in the north without access to freshwater.


And to end on something else: I feel like a thin wasteland could actually be good on the Western side of Iran. The Zagros Mountains are a formidable obstacle for any would-be conqueror, and why not reflect that with some choke-points?

I traced the western side of the range with World Hillshade and added in some possible passes in green (based on modern roads, don't know if they're historically accurate).

Spoiler: Zagros Mountains wasteland strip

https://www.arcgis.com/home/item.html?id=1b243539f4514b6ba35e7d995890db1d

 

[giorgi1999]

Ah, here comes the time when I'm critiquing The appearance of East Georgia in So called "project Caesar".

Well, well. East Georgia (also known as: Likhs Amereti, Kartli, Kartl-Kakheti, Iberia...) is the heart of Georgia. One of the three main subgroups of Georgians - Karts, started out here and were expanding slowly through two millennias until they united whole Georgia in 1008 year A.C. Tbilisi, the capital city, is also located here in east Georgia. So let's find out what is up with it.

Firstly, here is a map of historic geographical provinces of Eastern Georgia:
View attachment 1193827

Kartli and Kakheti are Breadbaskets of Georgia and one of the most airable, fertile lands in whole region. Kartli mostly produces fruit and granular products. While same is true about Kakheti, it is also one of the biggest per-capita Wine-producing regions in the entire world.

View attachment 1192018
here is a land mass map of fertile land in upper Kartli region.

View attachment 1192144
other fertile land masses around Georgia. as you can see it's mostly located in Kakheti. I think instead of flatlands there should be farmlands in Gori, Rustavi and Gremi. Wheat shoulf be produced in Gori instead of Iron. If not wheat at least fruits. If not it's an insult for Kartlian land.View attachment 1192556

This one is a preview for new province mapmode suggestion from me. Let's focus on the east Georgian provinces. As u can probably see, I've altered some locations and added a few. Firstly Jarekhi should be part of Kingdom of Georgia. Locals are Georgians, they have always declared king of Georgia as their rightful overlord. Same is true about Omalo. Omalo (Tusheti) is a historical Georgian province. The influence of Georgian kings didn't spread in only Omalo though, they even held influence over Didoeti to the east as well.

map of Didoeti in Geprgian:
View attachment 1192525
but I don't know id Didos were under Georgian rule during this time in history. So if u have sources please if u have a source for it comment.

So about provinces. First one I'll talk about today is Inner Kartli. here is a map of it:View attachment 1192548

So as u might have already noticed, I've divided Karli into two: Inner and Lower Kartli. they are marked by Trialeti range between them. Inner Kartli is, as I've mentioned before, one of breadbaskets of Georgia, so it always had high population. And Mtkvari river grows in size here, because several rivers like Liakhvi, Ksani and Aragvi flow into it from the Caucasus Mountains. This creates Perfect farming conditions.

As of locations. Imo Gori location shape should be altered into a shape alike to one on the map I've posted above and new "Surami" location should be added to the East. Surami Was castle and a settlement where from that pass between the west, east and South Georgia was guarded and watched over. It has imperative strategical importance. View attachment 1192553










- Surami is highlighted on the map. Also Surami-Shorapani should be the only direct pass between the east and west Georgia. as there are Likhi mountains between these two and it was extremally hard to pass on other places. Likhi has insignificant place in Georgian history, geography and culture. Very few invaders were ever able to cross it from the east Georgia. Even Mongols didn't (Tamerlane did sadly).


Because of this, impassable terrain should be altered like this:


View attachment 1192560
I've marked impassible locations proposed by me with red color. I'll talk about others later. Now, about Surami. As I said, Shorapani-Surami should be the only direct connecting locations to each other between the east and the west Georgia. also Tori-Surami (If Tinto team decides not to change it, Akhaltsikhe-Surami) should be one of only two connecting locations between South and East Georgia, the other one being Akhalkalaki-Kldekari pass.

Other things about Surami, population should be around 20-25 k. Terrain should be hills and woods. raw materials: legumes.
















Location 2: Gori. Gori should be fertile farmlands with population around 60-70k. This part of Georgia, thanks to agriculture has always been one of the most populated ones. Migration of peasants from western and southern Georgia also helped. is should be bordered by impassible Trialeti range from the south. Grain should be a raw material here.

Other locations: Mtkheta looks good, Population could be higher though and it should rather be hills, than mountains. Kvenipnevi also looks good but I'd add impassable mountains to the east (Mtiuleti range). Also I'd alter It's Shape a bit and add brand new Tskhinvali location instead of Tsagvli (view on maps 4 and 6). Tskhinvali would be located on historical Samachablo feudal substate (called "Satavados" in Georgia). It was sparsely populated mountainous and forested land. I thnk population here should be round 5-10 k. same should be true about kvenipnevi or "Ksani saeristavo" satavado, around 5k people. I Think Dusheti should be part of inner Katli rather than Kakheti Province. This "Dusheti" location was called "Aragvis saeristavo" and was part of Kartli historically and I'd rather call it "Ananuri". "Jarekhi" should be the part of the Kingdom of Georgia and Inner Katli province. Jarekhi, which is called Khevi in Georgian, has been part of Georgia since anticity, very important "Dariali pass" is located here which had been guarded By Georgians since forever. as of demographics, I think population should be majority Georgian all over Inner Kartli. I'd say around 90-95% Georgian eastern orthodox Christian with Georgian Jewish, catholic and Armenian minorities all around. I think Oseetians should be a strong minority in Tskhinvali and Dvaleti, but I don't know for sure, as king George V kicked them out.

Kvemo Kartli province: View attachment 1193274
This province Should be called "Lower Kartli" (or "Kvemo Kartli" in Georgian). I suggest adding Gardabani and Manglisi locations. Gardabani should be flatland grasslands, producing either wool, livestock or legumes with population around 20-25k. while Manglisi Should be woods and hills producing Iron with population of somewhere near 10k. About changes I'd make in already existing locations : Kldekari must be sparce plateau (I mean look at the map) with 5-10k population. Dmanisi, on the other hand, Woods and Hills with same amount of population. Tbilisi, the beautiful capital of Georgia, leave it as it is. About demographics: Kldekari and Manglisi should have almost exclusively Georgian population, while Dmanisi and Gardabani should have very strong Armenian Apostolic minority. Tbilisi Should be mostly Georgian with strong Armenian and Jewish minority. As of other ones, I think small pockets of nearby living Ethnic and religious groups, like Greeks, Persians, Arabs, Kurds, Udis and Assyrians, would live in Tbilisi.

Lets move on to Kakheti:
View attachment 1193282
Kakheti today has very different borders than it had in medieval times as Heretian identity swallowed into Kakhetian one after Kingdom of Kakheti become an offshoot Georgian state in 1466 after King George VIII fled there from King Bagrat VI (they both claimed to be the rightful king of Georgia). Despite everything, the borders shown above depicts Kakheti at the time somewhat accurately. In this aspect I agree with Tinto team with almost everything. But I still have some notes to make.

As I've said before, Dusheti should rather be part of Kartli than of Kakheti. Instead of it, I suggest, adding Omalo a one of Kakhetian locations and part of the Kingdom of Georgia in general. Omalo (Tusheti) is historical part of Georgia. We know that Pkhovians (Shatili location) migrated there in 4th century after they raised up against King Mirian IV after he converted to Christianity. Nakh people called "Batsbs" or "Tsovatushs" also live in Omalo. View attachment 1193616
here is the map of mountainous eastern Georgia. I've marked Batb settlement as "Tsovati".


View attachment 1193632
here are regions of kingdom of Kakheti in XVIII-th century as you can see Tinto team captured it's historical parts amicably. But Omalo is missing...

The last one Hereti:

View attachment 1193642
Hereti is another historical province in the east Georgia. It's borders have never been clearly defined. At times Heretian influence has been spreading over in North Caucasus, Gish region of modern day Azerbaijan and also was never defined to east with Kakheti ether. Hereti was not always a Georgian province, as, In ancient times, it was one of Georgian names for Caucasian Albania. Hereti, Rani, Arani, Alvaneti was all names of it in Georgian. Hereti was, most likely, name of eastern most province of Albania with which Georgians had most frequent interactions with. After Arabian invasion, Hereti was gradually Gorgonized thanks to it's eastern Orthodox religion. while other parts of Caucasian Albania were ether Islamized and then merged into larger Islamic peoples, assimilated into Armenian culture, or preserved their identity and language - Udis and Lezgs are good example for this. After king Bagrat IV-s conquest, Hereti became forever Georgian.

Okay so I agree with game developers on dividing this province into 5 locations. But despite that I have some problems with it. Those ones being, firstly, Shape of some of Locations. There never was a such settlement or a fortification called "Hereti" so naming some location is, imo, wrong. I suggest naming it "Khunani" which is much more historical and accurate location name. it being between Kura and Iori rivers also make sense, because it would have some natural boundaries. Same with Bodbe and Khornabuji.






My other and much bigger compliant however is about demographics. So my mother is from "Khornabuji" location or Dedoplistskaro municipality herself, so I have a great incite about it and nearby locations.I should say that in some places population is way too high. so 30k population in Bodbe and 17k population Belakani is cool, but in Khoranbuji there were, and still are, not enough settlements to support such a high number of population (30K). Same with "Hereti" location. there are no more than 5-6 settlements in both parts of Azerbaijan and Georgia that the location covers. View attachment 1193804
so, even today, in Dedoplistkaro municipality(On the map), which would cover partly both Khornabuji and Hereti locations on Tinto version of the map, there are 16 settlements. While most of them have more than 1000 people living there, same was not true in the middle ages. Also, out of those 19 settlements only 5 (in red circle) were actually populated in middle ages. Others got populated in different times during or after XIX-th century (explained on the map). To be honest though, around 5-10 settlements in Sighnanghi municipality also would still be part of Khornabuji location, so 10-15k population sounds just fine. Same is not true for Hereti location though, 3k people would be a generous estimations for it.












About Kaki (Qakh) location, firstly Georgians called it Kak-Eliseni or just Kakhi or Kaki, not Qakh. It would be way more populated than 11k people. There were many settlements there. Dozen rivers flowing down from Caucasus mountains make it a perfect place for human accommodation. so 25-30k people there sounds just good enough to me.

Other think about Hereti. I want to make a note about it's cultural composition. So, WHAT ON EARTH IS ADHARI CULTURE DOING IN KAKHI??? There are thousand documents from early XIV-th century that suggest that This Place was just as Georgian as any other locations to its east. Firstly, There is not even a little hint that Iranic peoples lived here, it's a complete bs not only from geographical point of view, but also from historical one. There are no mosques in Kaki or Kakh dating back before 17th century, when Daghestanis migrated there. Secondly, There are still many Georgians living in Qax, Belakan and Zakatala districts of Azerbaijan. View attachment 1193882View attachment 1193884
Here are two images describing demographic picture of those districts even in 21 century. So after Dagestanis took over it, most of Christian Georgians left for Kakheti, while ones that stayed most of the times were slowly assimilated into much larger Azeri and Dagestani identities. Georgians here were enslaved and forcefully Islamized by Persians and Avars and were called "Ingiloy", which literally means newly Islamized in Turkic. In mid XIX-th century Georgians living In Qax returned to Christianity though. So after 400 year ill-treatment and literal slavery strong Georgian minority still exists in Qax to this day and you guys are literally telling us that those Georgians are Adhars? Thirdly, there are historical records of Georgian churches being here and toponymics also are a good indicator of Georgian trace (I'm saying trace as if Georgians disappeared from Kakhi haha, they are still there). Here is one example: village of "Lekit". Lekit is located in middle of Qax district of Azerbaijan, near which no ethic Georgian villages are located. Despite this, there is a IX century church ruins there, we have historical documents that state visiting of Patriarch "Ekvtime III" in Lekit during the reign of the king George V "the brilliant", who is the king at the launche of the game. Also Lekit is Azeri name for this village, in Georgian it's named "Lekarti" which literally means "Georgian place" lol. Mose Janashvili, a Georgian Scholar who as litterally from Kakhi himself, says: View attachment 1193889
so there's no doubt that Kak-Eliseni, or "Qax" as you call it, was Georgian ethnically (probably with Udi minority).

P.s. My mothers family name is originally from Kakhi too. She has Georgian surname, not Iranian.

About toponymics, please give Georgian locations Georgian names : Lori - Lore, Balakan - Belakani, Qakh - Kaki/Kakhi. Kaki is the correct version. Kakhi/Qax is Azeri one. Here is Mose Janashvili talking about this issue: View attachment 1193890I know it's in Georgian, but I really can't ask for the scientific analysis in English language from a guy that wrote most of these articles in XIXth century.

About Udis, they probably were the majority in many locations especially in Gish, Vartashen and Nij. There is a strong Udi influence on Ingiloy (Belakani and Kakhi) and Kizikian (Khornabuji and Bodbe) dialect of Georgian language, without them being a majority or a strong minority in nearby provinces this wouldn't have been possible.

The last point I want to make - Tbilisi was the center of the trade in Caucasus, not Trapezund.

I think it's all for today. East Georgia is larger than southern one and I had to investigate a whole lot more, also my uni started this week and I barely had any time. Same as last one, feel free to criticize me. I'll try to follow up with Western Georgian part ASAP.

On the ending note, here is a picture of Khevsur (Shatili) warriors :View attachment 1194378

Here is a list of Georgian noble families form:
Kartli:

• Abamelik (Armenian)
• Abashishvili
• Abashidze
• Amatun (Armenian)
• Amilakhvari
• Amirejibi
• Arghutashvili (Mkhargrdzeli/Zakarian)
• Avalishvili
• Bagrationi (the ruling dynasty)
• Baratashvili
• Bebutashvili
• Begtabegishvili
• Chkheidze
• Davitashvili (Bagrationi cadet branch)
• Diasamidze
• Dolenjashvili
• Eristavi of Aragvi
• Eristavi of Ksani
• Gedevanishvili
• Guramishvili
• Iaralishvili
• Iashvili
• Iotamishvili
• Javakhishvili
• Kamsarakan (Armenian)
• Kherkheulidze
• Khidirbegishvili
• Khojaminasovi (Armenian)
• Machabeli
• Maghalashvili
• Melikishvili (Armenian)
• Mukhraneli (Bagrationi cadet branch)
• Orbeliani
• Palavandishvili
• Pavlenishvili
• Ratishvili
• Revazishvili
• Saakadze
• Shalikashvili
• Sharvashidze
• Sologhashvili
• Sumbatashvili
• Taktakishvili
• Tarkhnishvili
• Tumanishvili
• Tsitsishvili
• Vezirishvili
• Zurabishvili

Kakheti-Hereti:

• Abashidze
• Andronikashvili
• Apkhazi
• Arghutashvili (Mkhargrdzeli/Zakarian)
• Avalishvili
• Babadishvili
• Bagrationi (the ruling dynasty)
• Chavchavadze (Tchavtchavadze)
• Cherkezishvili
• Cholokashvili
• Guramishvili
• Gurgenidze
• Iashvili
• Jandieri
• Japaridze
• Jorjadze
• Karalashvili
• Khimshiashvili
• Kobulashvili
• Lionidze
• Makashvili
• Robitashvili
• Rusishvili
• Saginashvili
• Shalikashvili
• Sidamonidze
• Tusishvili
• Vachnadze
• Vakhvavkishvili

Hah. and here I thought I was going too much into the nitty-gritty of things.

good job man, not much to critique here tbh.

But there is one more general thing I'd like to add.

The topic of demographics is quite tricky, with the lack of sources that we have.
And judging how and where people used to live, based current population distributions is faulty.

For example, Kakheti is full of abandoned, settlements, monasteries, castles, etc. in what are now very sparsely populated areas.
The area of the Gombori pass is a good example of that.

As you know, there was a huge upheaval between the start date of this game to today.
The black death, Tamerlane and then Persians, did a real number on the country as a whole.
And eastern Georgia almost always took the brunt of the damage dealt by them.

Even just looking at the names of some of the villages now, can give a pretty big hint. e.g. Tsinandali

So areas of Qizik'i, might not have been that devoid of population way back when.
Although I would still think it would have been moderate at best, considering the climate and geography of the area.

Other than that got no real remarks, that I didn't already include in my own post.
Like about maybe including some sort of impassible terrain to represent the rather, not so easily traversable area of the gombori pass.

 

[giorgi1999]

I try to match the current development, of course more accurate and precise changes would be better but I still don't get it what you mean by kinda off, give me the exact thing and your counterargument dude or just don't comment such bullshit.

P.S. Yes, I'm Georgian.

1. Armenia being directly controlled by Georgia is most likely very wrong, as demonstrated by the arguments and sources others already posted.

Samtskhe was in a very delicate situation. It was effectively independent until George V consolidated the country and after his death very soon after, it's autonomy sprang back up even more.
Because of that, I think it makes sense to represent it as a vassal, to demonstrate the unstable control the king's court held over it.
It can even be argued that western Georgia should also be in a similar state. But I think that's better to represent though a later occurring dissolution disaster.

2. "Adyghean (Later Abkhazians)" "population too would be Mingrelian" - this is bs. Abkhazians and adygheans diverged from each other around 3000 years ago.
"invasion/migration sometime later in 15-16 century" - in all likelihood there were abkhazians in the territory of odishi already. The debate lies more on what was the share of abkhazians vs mingrelians in the are from sokhumi to inguri, instead of whether there were any abkhazians there or not.

" Lata should be populated by Svan, even until recently Svans lived there." - afaik, the svans who lived there until recently migrated there during the past couple of centuries, after many abkhazians were forced by the Russian empire to leave.
I wouldn't be surprised in there were svans in that area back then, but we simply do not have enough info to judge that at all.

"Here's a French map..." - that is just a french translation of the vakhushti batonishvili map, also made in the 18th century. His maps are quite accurate when it comes to Kartli(area where he also directly participated in administrating), but the farther away you go from there the more erroneous things become.
Just look at where the river in svaneti (which should be enguri) is flowing to.

3. other guy already corrected you on this one.

4. afaik, that pass wasn't really suitable for traversing with large armies, but might be wrong. maybe making it a traversable wasteland might be a good idea, some other passes in the region too for that matter.

5. again the other guy already said what I wanted to

6. not much to say about this one tbh.

 

[Ekyman]

The Anthromes 1300 AD layer (from HYDE 3.3) comes in three flavors: Baseline, lower and upper scenarios, where lower and upper model more or less (respectively) human influence on land use.
...
My biggest takeaway here is not actually about Iran, but that Turkmenistan and the area to the east of Urgench could do with a little less wasteland, representing shrublands and previously irrigated land.

I am pretty suspect of the land use/anthromes/population data for Uzbekistan/Turkmenistan in this time period, particularly for drawing fine distinctions about where wastelands should be. The rangeland/grazing land didn't magically cut off at the modern border of Kazakhstan, it does that because of data shenanigans, especially because we know from sources that some of the Turkmen further south had many, many sheep (this isn't the only place this happens - apparently in 1300 Georgia was mostly rangeland which instantly ended at the modern border. The anthromes also show basically no change between 1200 and 1300, despite the area being absolutely devastated by the Mongols; 1300 in fact shows more cropland than 1200, while 1200 was basically a golden age of Khwarazm. The cropland also doesn't seem to align with the sources, there's probably not enough cropland shown in the Khwarazm oasis and the irrigated area does not seem extensive enough. Population is a similar tale.

That said, there are areas on the east side of the oasis that are farmed today and have pre-game-era forts that are wasteland on the map. I tried a little to find out when those areas were irrigated, but wasn't really successful. There's also a complicated history of where subrivers of the Amu and Syr Darya ran, at some points in history they stretched much more extensively into the desert area than at others and it's a pretty vague history. It's very possible there should be more locations on the east side, and the situation is pretty unclear, but there's probably a good argument that could be made with more research.

 

[King_Potat]

An Uzboy River & Caspian Sea Piracy Representation Proposal

This proposal pretty much only exists because I somehow got half a copy of Gloukhovsky’s “The Passage of the Water of the Amu-Darya by its Old Bed into the Caspian Sea” from my local library and the general underrepresentation of habited locations in central asia when compared to regions of similar habitability (ex: northern scandinavia). His maps are terrible, but essentially the flow of the Uzboy river used to be large enough that is was able to flow from the Sarygamysh lake into the Caspian sea (specifically through the northwestern portion of the Turkmenbashy gulf), creating an extremely arid, but habitable passageway (even if the water was a bit salty at times, it could be boiled away to make available drinking water w/ proper equipment) to the Caspian sea until ~1590 (according to him, although from what I can tell, most others point to a later date sometime in the early to mid 17th century); very roughly depicted by the blue line. This proposal seeks to add 2-3 locations of uncolonized land from western Turkmenistan to the Caspian sea coast of Turkmenistan. The idea is that the uncolonized lands bordering the Caspian sea will turn into pirate coves because of lack of control, and no one will be able/want to colonize this land because it will be lacking in everything a state could actually want. It will also require either a research investment or a time investment to manage as a tag needs to occasionally go over there to stamp them out or a tag needs to invest specifically in tech that will allow it to colonize uncolonized lands, either way not really worth the time, so theoretically the pirates will prosper in the same circumstance they did in real life.

1. This would be the location of Bala-Ishem, likely a small town at the time and also the name of the salt-marshes that would later be formed by the dried up Uzboy river. Also possibly the name of a small Khakas tribe because Gloukhovsky mentions it may have been, and then doesn’t continue with the point. Either way it's RGO should be salt, its population low, and its climate cold arid, w/ desert and flatland topography.
2. Cheleken is also basically the reason this proposal exists, as it was a massive center for pirates to dock their ships as it was small enough to fit the pirates ships but horrid for any proper navy, and the way the peninsula is laid out makes it easy to spot other boats coming. Essentially a seasonal pirate paradise until Nadir Shah got pissed at them and dunked on them so hard that they never came back. RGO should probably be fish, as it was likely the main source of food for the pirates that routinely inhabited the Cheleken peninsula. It should be cold arid, desert, and flatland.
3. This is a long shot, even for this proposal, but Kyzyl-Su is supposed to be the third location. While not particularly a hotbed of piracy, it was fairly routinely inhabited by various Turks from as far back as the 10th century. If it is added, then its RGO should probably be sand, with an arid/cold arid climate, and flatland desert topography. Nevertheless, this location is mostly present for three reasons,
   1. One, it is decently habitable land on the eastern side of the Caspian sea given that the Uzboy exists.
   2. Two, for further representation of pirates. Some pirates likely existed here, but most were based in Cheleken. Either way due to game mechanics two uncolonized locations will create more pirates, more akin to real life numbers.
   3. Three, it is the modern site of Turkmenbashy, and was developed as early as 1717, which while quite late certainly isn’t out of the time frame.

Bit of a long shot proposal, but I think it would be a good addition. I am not the most knowledgeable about Central Asia (outside of post-Soviet Uzbekistan), so do make suggestions.

Edit: Bala-Ishem's RGO should be wool (as pointed out by Ekyman), but a decision could exist to switch the RGO to salt given the deposits that existed after the Uzboy river fully dried up.

 

[Ekyman]

until ~1590 (according to him, although from what I can tell, most others point to a later date sometime in the early to mid 17th century)

Basically every source I've seen says the mid to late 1500s if not earlier, including both primary sources and modern secondary sources. That also matches better with the water level in the Caspian (and I believe the Aral as well). But that's not super important for the proposal.

The idea is that the uncolonized lands bordering the Caspian sea will turn into pirate coves because of lack of control, and no one will be able/want to colonize this land because it will be lacking in everything a state could actually want. It will also require either a research investment or a time investment to manage as a tag needs to occasionally go over there to stamp them out or a tag needs to invest specifically in tech that will allow it to colonize uncolonized lands, either way not really worth the time, so theoretically the pirates will prosper in the same circumstance they did in real life.

I'm not inherently opposed to this area being uncolonized at the start of the game, since the state of control at that point is pretty unclear. But the problem with this line of thinking is that we know that the area was essentially "owned" in the early 1500s (by which I mean we have a data point from the 1500s where it is clearly in a colonized/owned state, not that it necessarily only became colonized at that point), as the inhabitants rejected the ruler, lost the ensuing war, and had to pay reparations in many thousands of sheep which then became an annual tax. And this is written more as if it was expected that they would accept the ruler, not as an initial conquest. I am unsure of its political state in the 1300s, as I said, but its later state seems more accurate to model as an owned non-core location with low control and tribal pops. Unfortunately I'm not sure the game is super well equipped to handle a location that drifts in and out of active ownership due more to semi-nomadic tribal inhabitants and shifting interest of rulers than inherent difficulty of owning it if you really care and have the military strength to effect it. Certainly the ruler in the early 1500s seems to have had zero troubles proving his rule with military might.

Bala-Ishemit's RGO should be salt,

Although the water in the area was probably salty, I haven't seen any evidence of large-scale salt production there. The minimal descriptions we have of the Uzboy river in its wet state were of agriculture, though I'm unclear of the proportion of crops vs animals. The inhabitants of the area in the 1500s paid taxes with massive numbers of sheep, which is why I said an RGO of wool in my post.

This is a long shot, even for this proposal, but Kyzyl-Su is supposed to be the third location

I saw the Kyzyl-Su name when I was working on my proposal, but since I couldn't find any information whatsoever about it's historical background other than one somewhat questionable article from the late 1800s saying it was teleported from a different feature that it initially described, I didn't include it. I don't have any direct opposition to it either though; the options I've found for that location are just a heap of unclarity. Wikipedia also has Shagadam but I have no idea what the progeny or accuracy of that is, other than that there's apparently a small peak on the peninsula with that name.

Your location borders are different than mine but frankly I don't have strong opinions about that. Other than following the channel of the Uzboy, everything about drawing borders here is pretty arbitrary. I think I might like your borders for Kyzyl-Su here better than mine, as long as the connections and size still work, although finding the balance between what's most suitable for permanent settlements and where semi-nomadic tribes might have roamed is hard. Mine weighed more, maybe too much more, towards the latter, but the sources are so sparse it's really hard to say.

 

[skep17]

1. Armenia being directly controlled by Georgia is most likely very wrong, as demonstrated by the arguments and sources others already posted.

Samtskhe was in a very delicate situation. It was effectively independent until George V consolidated the country and after his death very soon after, it's autonomy sprang back up even more.
Because of that, I think it makes sense to represent it as a vassal, to demonstrate the unstable control the king's court held over it.
It can even be argued that western Georgia should also be in a similar state. But I think that's better to represent though a later occurring dissolution disaster.

2. "Adyghean (Later Abkhazians)" "population too would be Mingrelian" - this is bs. Abkhazians and adygheans diverged from each other around 3000 years ago.
"invasion/migration sometime later in 15-16 century" - in all likelihood there were abkhazians in the territory of odishi already. The debate lies more on what was the share of abkhazians vs mingrelians in the are from sokhumi to inguri, instead of whether there were any abkhazians there or not.

" Lata should be populated by Svan, even until recently Svans lived there." - afaik, the svans who lived there until recently migrated there during the past couple of centuries, after many abkhazians were forced by the Russian empire to leave.
I wouldn't be surprised in there were svans in that area back then, but we simply do not have enough info to judge that at all.

"Here's a French map..." - that is just a french translation of the vakhushti batonishvili map, also made in the 18th century. His maps are quite accurate when it comes to Kartli(area where he also directly participated in administrating), but the farther away you go from there the more erroneous things become.
Just look at where the river in svaneti (which should be enguri) is flowing to.

3. other guy already corrected you on this one.

4. afaik, that pass wasn't really suitable for traversing with large armies, but might be wrong. maybe making it a traversable wasteland might be a good idea, some other passes in the region too for that matter.

5. again the other guy already said what I wanted to

6. not much to say about this one tbh.

1. We should look the territories with lenses of geopolitics because it's a map game, not political game. I gave several sources from that time where it's clearly mentioned that Armenian territories are considered as much Georgia as Kakheti for example. Armenian monk writes himself that he comes from Yerevan, Georgia in 1336. Feudal system is hard to represent in EU 5 with its varying dependences, it's not a CK game so at that particular time it would be more accurate to make both Armenia and Samtskhe as part of one political entity on the map. Otherwise just disintegrate the whole country and make separate duchies that did have certain degree of autonomy. I'd even say Georgian kings had more control over Armenia and Samtskhe throughout centuries than ever on Svaneti or eastern highlands so in that case those territories must also be represented as vassals.

2. By Adyghean I meant Abkhaz-Adyghe cluster, just shortened it. I deliberately didn't use Circassian to make that difference you're talking about. Yes, there would be some Abkhazians in Odishi at that time, considering the fact that territories of modern day Abkhazia till Anacopia was part of Odishi. Abkhazia has always been a frontier and different people lived in different parts of it but when we see clear political change on the map and dominance of certain culture that gives us clues of some sort of migration or invasion from the west to the east. How do you explain Kelasuri wall? By the way, modern genetics studies suggest that modern Abkhazians are genetically closer to Mingrelians than Circassians. That could explain assimilation of some Mingrelians into Abkhazian culture.

In general, Svans did settle there after Abkhazians were resettled in Turkey but it doesn't mean Svans didn't live there at all. That territory was called Dali, one of the historical regions of Georgia. As you point out, again, we shouldn't make conclusions by current realities but we shouldn't also conclude anything based on 18-19th centuries when we talk about first half of 14th century.

3. I gave my response to the other guy.

4. I gave response to the other guy for this too. How do you think Bagrat III of Imereti controlled Samtskhe (when he briefly controlled it in 15th century)? Through Adjara? Zekari pass was as rough and hard to cross as any pass on Likhi range, you always point out not to make conclusions based on current situation and why won't you do the same here? Yeah, currently that pass is neglected and not built up to cross between Imereti and Samtskhe while Goderdzi pass is taken care of. By the way, prior to the battle of Khresili in 1757, Ottoman army used that pass to cross into Imereti (through Sairme) from Samtskhe and if we rely on the contemporary sources it wasn't a small army.

5. I gave my response to the other guy.

 

[nyetflix2]

I agree but looking at the current population distribution of Afghanistan is very deceiving as it does not tell you the full story of forced migration, assimilation and massacres which took place during the beginning of the Afghan Pashtun nation state. Which is why I recommend books from historical figures such as Babur who goes into detail of his visits to the many parts of what is now known as modern day "Afghanistan".

Also this map you're showing clusters Aimagh/Aymaq/Aymagh(Western provinces to the west of the Yellow ie Hazara population) as Tajiks which is not accurate. They are closer to Hazaras(Turko-Mongolic Shia - Persian Speaking) and Uzbeks(Turkic Sunni). Aimagh is a Turko-Mongol name.

Do we know when the ethnogenesis of the Aymaq took place?

 

[SuperLexxe]

1. We should look the territories with lenses of geopolitics because it's a map game, not political game. I gave several sources from that time where it's clearly mentioned that Armenian territories are considered as much Georgia as Kakheti for example. Armenian monk writes himself that he comes from Yerevan, Georgia in 1336. Feudal system is hard to represent in EU 5 with its varying dependences, it's not a CK game so at that particular time it would be more accurate to make both Armenia and Samtskhe as part of one political entity on the map. Otherwise just disintegrate the whole country and make separate duchies that did have certain degree of autonomy. I'd even say Georgian kings had more control over Armenia and Samtskhe throughout centuries than ever on Svaneti or eastern highlands so in that case those territories must also be represented as vassals.

2. By Adyghean I meant Abkhaz-Adyghe cluster, just shortened it. I deliberately didn't use Circassian to make that difference you're talking about. Yes, there would be some Abkhazians in Odishi at that time, considering the fact that territories of modern day Abkhazia till Anacopia was part of Odishi. Abkhazia has always been a frontier and different people lived in different parts of it but when we see clear political change on the map and dominance of certain culture that gives us clues of some sort of migration or invasion from the west to the east. How do you explain Kelasuri wall? By the way, modern genetics studies suggest that modern Abkhazians are genetically closer to Mingrelians than Circassians. That could explain assimilation of some Mingrelians into Abkhazian culture.

In general, Svans did settle there after Abkhazians were resettled in Turkey but it doesn't mean Svans didn't live there at all. That territory was called Dali, one of the historical regions of Georgia. As you point out, again, we shouldn't make conclusions by current realities but we shouldn't also conclude anything based on 18-19th centuries when we talk about first half of 14th century.

3. I gave my response to the other guy.

4. I gave response to the other guy for this too. How do you think Bagrat III of Imereti controlled Samtskhe (when he briefly controlled it in 15th century)? Through Adjara? Zekari pass was as rough and hard to cross as any pass on Likhi range, you always point out not to make conclusions based on current situation and why won't you do the same here? Yeah, currently that pass is neglected and not built up to cross between Imereti and Samtskhe while Goderdzi pass is taken care of. By the way, prior to the battle of Khresili in 1757, Ottoman army used that pass to cross into Imereti (through Sairme) from Samtskhe and if we rely on the contemporary sources it wasn't a small army.

5. I gave my response to the other guy.

Some Armenian sources do speak of being under Georgia. But they do so also in a time when the Armenians were paying their taxes and providing levies for the Ilkhanate. It is a bit of a contradiction of liege relations. We can assume this is only a nominal fealty by the Armenians to Georgia, as I pointed out before, as a means of legitimacy and prestige, rather than out of obligation.

In my eyes, what constitutes a vassal is defacto, not dejure suzerainity. Otherwise we could claim that England should be a vassal of France according to titular hierarchy. But that is not the case.

And let us not forget that Armenian colophons cease mentioning George V as king of Armenia after his Mongol patron, amir Chupan, was executed. I don't think that is a coincidence.

And why did Georgia continue paying tribute long after having "expelled" the Mongols, as Georgian histories claim? This is accounted in the Ilkhanate revenues for 1336, and the coin evidence in Georgia points to a mint in Tiflis, of all places, churning out Mongol coinage until the 1350s.

 

[giorgi1999]

1. We should look the territories with lenses of geopolitics because it's a map game, not political game. I gave several sources from that time where it's clearly mentioned that Armenian territories are considered as much Georgia as Kakheti for example. Armenian monk writes himself that he comes from Yerevan, Georgia in 1336. Feudal system is hard to represent in EU 5 with its varying dependences, it's not a CK game so at that particular time it would be more accurate to make both Armenia and Samtskhe as part of one political entity on the map. Otherwise just disintegrate the whole country and make separate duchies that did have certain degree of autonomy. I'd even say Georgian kings had more control over Armenia and Samtskhe throughout centuries than ever on Svaneti or eastern highlands so in that case those territories must also be represented as vassals.

2. By Adyghean I meant Abkhaz-Adyghe cluster, just shortened it. I deliberately didn't use Circassian to make that difference you're talking about. Yes, there would be some Abkhazians in Odishi at that time, considering the fact that territories of modern day Abkhazia till Anacopia was part of Odishi. Abkhazia has always been a frontier and different people lived in different parts of it but when we see clear political change on the map and dominance of certain culture that gives us clues of some sort of migration or invasion from the west to the east. How do you explain Kelasuri wall? By the way, modern genetics studies suggest that modern Abkhazians are genetically closer to Mingrelians than Circassians. That could explain assimilation of some Mingrelians into Abkhazian culture.

In general, Svans did settle there after Abkhazians were resettled in Turkey but it doesn't mean Svans didn't live there at all. That territory was called Dali, one of the historical regions of Georgia. As you point out, again, we shouldn't make conclusions by current realities but we shouldn't also conclude anything based on 18-19th centuries when we talk about first half of 14th century.

3. I gave my response to the other guy.

4. I gave response to the other guy for this too. How do you think Bagrat III of Imereti controlled Samtskhe (when he briefly controlled it in 15th century)? Through Adjara? Zekari pass was as rough and hard to cross as any pass on Likhi range, you always point out not to make conclusions based on current situation and why won't you do the same here? Yeah, currently that pass is neglected and not built up to cross between Imereti and Samtskhe while Goderdzi pass is taken care of. By the way, prior to the battle of Khresili in 1757, Ottoman army used that pass to cross into Imereti (through Sairme) from Samtskhe and if we rely on the contemporary sources it wasn't a small army.

5. I gave my response to the other guy.

1. The mountain areas weren't really political players, while Samtskhe and the various entities in Armenia were.
You provided sources yes, but others provided their own sources pointing to the contrary as well.
From my POV, I'm not sure how appropriate it is to make Armenia a georgian vassal, but I don't really mind it either way.

2. Pretty sure Odishi went up to Tskhumi and that's it. Maybe some nominal suzerainty was a thing for a time. But for the vast period of time this game will take place, the principality of abkhazia and odishi/mingrelia were on even grounds, political rank-wise.
Let's not go into genetics, because the story is much more complex than what you say.
I'll just say this and let's move on from this: overall admixture-wise yes, but there is a clear distinction when it comes to the paternal lines and the admixture similarity could be explained by other reasons, all in all it's a bit too early to make any 100% concrete evaluations based on genetics. Hints at best.

And regarding the wall and all the other stuff:
territory of a political entity =/= cultural distribution.
The princes of Odishi could have ruled over areas with abkhazian majority, similarly how the kings of Kartli ruled over lands mostly populated by armenians.
If you have some source or indications that really removes the possibility of significant amount of Abkhazians living east of Tskhumi back then, please do cite them,

About the svans: yeah, but we are basically left with these two facts only.
1. after the ethnic cleansing of the abkhazians, that area was empty, meaning there probably weren't many svans around that time in the 19th century.
2. there are some toponymical evidences of svans living there sometime in the past, but we have no idea how far back that was.
So imo, we shouldn't adamantly claim that there were significant amount of svans in that area, around this time.

4. as I said, I think the best idea would be to implement traversable wastelands for most of these passes.

Also zekari is not as easy to go through as the passes through likhi.
I mean zekari is literally in the alpine zone, that's probably how it gets its name.

 

[skep17]

---

Added Georgia changes, though I must say personally it still doesn't feel quite right, hence I do not consider these changes as legit. The sources provided mention Georgian influence in Armenia in the years of Abu Sa'ids reign, but the Ilkhanate was in its "golden era" at that time. In this context, I would take such claims of grandeur with a grain of salt.

It is simply conjecture, but I believe that when sources mention Armenia under Georgia, it is because Armenia was considered Georgia for much of its history. So while the Mongols transferred the pragmatic vassal relations (taxes & levies) of the Armenians to themselves, the Armenians were still nominally under Georgian suzerainity, as seen with the Armenians holding various Georgian titles, be it for prestige or legitimacy, while under the Ilkhanate.

---

View attachment 1194484

---

The below source is more critical of Georgian influence at the time, with a few choice screenshots. It is likely that after the fall of Chupan, king Giorgi V lost much of his standing within the Ilkhanate, and of his influence over the Armenians, with whom he shared only a nominal liege relationship. It also goes on to detail some of the contrast between the Georgian histories and the contemporary Persian and Arabic writings and tax accounts, and of the numismatic history.

Why would Georgia mint Mongol coinage in Tiflis, the capital of Georgia, long after breaking off with them, nevermind continuing to pay tribute, despite having "expelled" the Mongols?

"Georgia in the Reign of Giorgi the Brilliant" (1955):

View attachment 1194470
View attachment 1194475
View attachment 1194477

---

Not mentioning George as a king of Armenians might have different meaning than that you're implying. In 1320's it might have been important to mention 2 Armenian kingdoms because prior to that Ilkhanate had good control over Georgia and there were several kings at once so most likely Armenia had huge autonomy. Later George is not mentioned as a king of Armenia either because he lost control over it or because Armenia was now considered integral part of Georgia and only king of Armenians to be mentioned was a king on Cilician throne. While the document from the screenshot says there's no mention of George as king of Armenians it says nothing then who's mentioned as king of Armenians or who's mentioned in general. I did provide one of such sources that mentioned just Burteli Orbeliani but it doesn't mean he was independent, there's no other name than his. I gave one example from 1336, written by Armenian monk in Crimea when he puts he comes from Yerevan, Georgia. Why would he write that in 1336 if Georgia (king George) effectively lost control on Armenia? While up until George it's common to mention Georgian kings as kings of Abkhazians, Georgians, Armenians etc. it soon shortens to be just king of Georgia so it might have been a new practice to drop this multitude of titles and use just one, maybe a legal act to consolidate power further. If you're king of A and B, you can lost title of B and just become king of A while some other person becomes king of B but if you just become king of A and still retain the territories of B, basically abolishing the title, there's only one throne to fought for. Imagine you're playing CK3 and you have 2-3 kingdom titles with 2-3 sons while not having primogeniture. Would you abolish one kingdom title to prevent any succession issues?

George was minting Mongol coins because it was widely used in middle east and it was needed for trade. Georgians minted 2 coins, bronze for local use that was detailed with only Georgian symbols and silver coin, replicas of widely used coins intended for global trade. Don't forget that at that time Georgia is the only Christian country in the region, Crusades are not that far away history and why would overwhelmingly Muslim world trade with Christian coins. In general, Georgians were minting foreign coins of powerful cultures/empires for centuries to fit in. Basically minting Mongol/Persian coins for Georgia was like using USD today. Even today, I doubt anyone would trade with Georgia in Georgian Lari and back then they didn't really embraced liberal ideas of respecting other cultures/religions, did they?

 

[SuperLexxe]

Not mentioning George as a king of Armenians might have different meaning than that you're implying. In 1320's it might have been important to mention 2 Armenian kingdoms because prior to that Ilkhanate had good control over Georgia and there were several kings at once so most likely Armenia had huge autonomy. Later George is not mentioned as a king of Armenia either because he lost control over it or because Armenia was now considered integral part of Georgia and only king of Armenians to be mentioned was a king on Cilician throne. While the document from the screenshot says there's no mention of George as king of Armenians it says nothing then who's mentioned as king of Armenians or who's mentioned in general. I did provide one of such sources that mentioned just Burteli Orbeliani but it doesn't mean he was independent, there's no other name than his. I gave one example from 1336, written by Armenian monk in Crimea when he puts he comes from Yerevan, Georgia. Why would he write that in 1336 if Georgia (king George) effectively lost control on Armenia? While up until George it's common to mention Georgian kings as kings of Abkhazians, Georgians, Armenians etc. it soon shortens to be just king of Georgia so it might have been a new practice to drop this multitude of titles and use just one, maybe a legal act to consolidate power further. If you're king of A and B, you can lost title of B and just become king of A while some other person becomes king of B but if you just become king of A and still retain the territories of B, basically abolishing the title, there's only one throne to fought for. Imagine you're playing CK3 and you have 2-3 kingdom titles with 2-3 sons while not having primogeniture. Would you abolish one kingdom title to prevent any succession issues?

George was minting Mongol coins because it was widely used in middle east and it was needed for trade. Georgians minted 2 coins, bronze for local use that was detailed with only Georgian symbols and silver coin, replicas of widely used coins intended for global trade. Don't forget that at that time Georgia is the only Christian country in the region, Crusades are not that far away history and why would overwhelmingly Muslim world trade with Christian coins. In general, Georgians were minting foreign coins of powerful cultures/empires for centuries to fit in. Basically minting Mongol/Persian coins for Georgia was like using USD today. Even today, I doubt anyone would trade with Georgia in Georgian Lari and back then they didn't really embraced liberal ideas of respecting other cultures/religions, did they?

My contention is that mentioning Georgia was because the title still held meaning in Armenian society due to their past dominion. We can see the same phenomenon across Europe in lands where the local nobility would emulate foreign suzerains or atleast respect a title, such as the English nobility for France. We know the Armenians held Georgian titles like the atabeg, despite being defacto Mongol vassals. There was no shared past with the Mongols from which the Armenian lords could legitimize themselves with, unlike with Georgia.

When amir Chupan was executed, his friend George V lost his patronage and standing in the Ilkhanate. Hence, as an Armenian lord it would have been prudent to distance yourself from Georgia at the time, which would have been easy if your fealty to Georgia was only nominal, and not enforced. The Kingdom of Ani might have been such an example.

 

[skep17]

My contention is that mentioning Georgia was because the title still held meaning in Armenian society due to their past dominion. We can see the same phenomenon across Europe in lands where the local nobility would emulate foreign suzerains or atleast respect a title, such as the English nobility for France. We know the Armenians held Georgian titles like the atabeg, despite being defacto Mongol vassals. There was no shared past with the Mongols from which the Armenian lords could legitimize themselves with, unlike with Georgia.

When amir Chupan was executed, his friend George V lost his patronage and standing in the Ilkhanate. Hence, as an Armenian lord it would have been prudent to distance yourself from Georgia at the time, which would have been easy if your fealty to Georgia was only nominal, and not enforced. The Kingdom of Ani might have been such an example.

Execution of Chupan actually played significant role in George's struggle for complete independence. Chobanids ruled around Tabriz and Shirvan, neighboring areas of Caucasus so they were immediate threat to Georgians and Armenians. Chupan was close ally of George and he used his execution as 'casus belli' to rebel against Ilkhanate rule and stopped paying tribute. He slowly consolidated power after 1320's and ruled till 1346.

I often see misconception of Georgian-Armenian relations in those centuries. When Georgians took over Armenian lands it was considered something like Reconquista, freeing Christian (Armenian) lands from Muslims (Seljuks). Bagrationis had close ties with Armenian Bagratunis and there was not a big issue of legitimacy so basically Bagrationis were considered as regular kings for Armenians. Armenians lived in Tbilisi too at that time and basically till 19th century eastern Georgian trade was based on Armenian merchants. Georgian kings learned to speak Armenian too alongside Persian or any other lingua franca of the region signifying Armenian influence in the kingdom of Georgia or later in the kingdom of Kartli. So, there wasn't ethnic kingdoms but geographical ones. Even after loosing Samtskhe and Armenia there were still some lands Georgian kings ruled where ethnic Armenians lived.

Anyways, back to Armenians being de-facto independent, it would be extremely unlikely in the last years of George's rule. He wasn't called "Brilliant" for no reason, his rule is considered mini golden age of Georgia. I would say during last decade of his rule Georgia had as much control over Ani as Tamar had. There's even correspondence between him and Phillip VI of France that he promises to participate in Crusade with the French king if such Crusade ever happens and he really comes to Levant to free the "Holy Land". He also campaigned in Shirvan in the second half of his rule (I don't remember the exact year) so it's hard to believe he could provide 30k soldiers to participate in a Crusade in Levant thousands of km's away from Georgia but lost control on Armenia which was considered part of the kingdom for at least a century now. Nominal control and de-facto independence would be more accurate after his death.

This is king George's promise to Phillip in Latin:
«Domini reges Franciae frequenter reges orientales commoverunt contra Saracenos, postea nonvenientes eos dimittebant in tribulatione guerrae ; sed dicatis sibi, quod, quando mare transiverit, statimme videbit ad suum beneplacitum cum XXX millibus armatorum».

Ambassadors were Riccard Mercerii and Alexandrum Anglicum, they first went to Tabriz and then to Georgia to find allies against Mamluks.

 

[SuperLexxe]

Execution of Chupan actually played significant role in George's struggle for complete independence. Chobanids ruled around Tabriz and Shirvan, neighboring areas of Caucasus so they were immediate threat to Georgians and Armenians. Chupan was close ally of George and he used his execution as 'casus belli' to rebel against Ilkhanate rule and stopped paying tribute. He slowly consolidated power after 1320's and ruled till 1346.

I often see misconception of Georgian-Armenian relations in those centuries. When Georgians took over Armenian lands it was considered something like Reconquista, freeing Christian (Armenian) lands from Muslims (Seljuks). Bagrationis had close ties with Armenian Bagratunis and there was not a big issue of legitimacy so basically Bagrationis were considered as regular kings for Armenians. Armenians lived in Tbilisi too at that time and basically till 19th century eastern Georgian trade was based on Armenian merchants. Georgian kings learned to speak Armenian too alongside Persian or any other lingua franca of the region signifying Armenian influence in the kingdom of Georgia or later in the kingdom of Kartli. So, there wasn't ethnic kingdoms but geographical ones. Even after loosing Samtskhe and Armenia there were still some lands Georgian kings ruled where ethnic Armenians lived.

Anyways, back to Armenians being de-facto independent, it would be extremely unlikely in the last years of George's rule. He wasn't called "Brilliant" for no reason, his rule is considered mini golden age of Georgia. I would say during last decade of his rule Georgia had as much control over Ani as Tamar had. There's even correspondence between him and Phillip VI of France that he promises to participate in Crusade with the French king if such Crusade ever happens and he really comes to Levant to free the "Holy Land". He also campaigned in Shirvan in the second half of his rule (I don't remember the exact year) so it's hard to believe he could provide 30k soldiers to participate in a Crusade in Levant thousands of km's away from Georgia but lost control on Armenia which was considered part of the kingdom for at least a century now. Nominal control and de-facto independence would be more accurate after his death.

This is king George's promise to Phillip in Latin:
«Domini reges Franciae frequenter reges orientales commoverunt contra Saracenos, postea nonvenientes eos dimittebant in tribulatione guerrae ; sed dicatis sibi, quod, quando mare transiverit, statimme videbit ad suum beneplacitum cum XXX millibus armatorum».

Ambassadors were Riccard Mercerii and Alexandrum Anglicum, they first went to Tabriz and then to Georgia to find allies against Mamluks.

I find it odd that the Ilkhanate, which at that time (reign of Abu Sa'id) was in it's own golden era, and had defeated the invasion by the Golden Horde, would have simply sat back and let Georgia slip away, taking all of Armenia with them, with no records of attempting to reconquer them? After all, Armenia and Georgia are only a few days ride from the capital of Tabriz and the Ordos' pastures in Arran and Mughan. Especially when Georgia is recorded to have paid tribute in 1336, which gives doubt as to just how independent George V really was, and of his control over Armenia.

You mentioned George V spoke of 30 000 men. Let us not forget the Ilkhanate had 17 tümens, that is, 170 000 men. Mongols are not famous for mercy, and George V having colluded with the traitor Chupan, and subsequently rebelled, would not have been taken lightly.

Either Georgia somehow was capable of holding off the Ilkhanate from all their lands, something the Golden Horde couldn't do. Or, the exploits of George V are exaggerated, and he more than likely placated Abu Sa'id Ilkhan, and took advantage of the later civil war, closer to our start date.

Not to mention the later battles between the Chobanids and Jalayirids across Armenia. Why would Georgia permit something so devastating to take place in Armenia, something you say would be directly controlled by them, when not even a decade prior they had been able to hold off the Ilkhanate as a whole?

---

There is also the question of why George V stopped appearing in Armenian colophons. You mention that there would not have been a need for it specifically. But why would his name disappear in its entirety if that was the case? If he were the king of Georgia, ruling over Armenia, why would the colophons not mention him, as they had prior to Chupans execution? Excluding the ruler of the realm you live in from your work sounds rather disrespectful if you ask me, especially if you continue to mention the ruler of the neighbouring rival realm.