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

[giorgi1999]

Thank you very much for such a well-made Georgia, they didn’t even forget about the Mingrelian people, of which I am a part!
I'll be a nerd for a bit

there is a severe lack of wine regions in Samegrelo and Kakheti. We Mingrelians, like the Kakheti people, are completely obsessed with wine, and therefore making only 2 wine provinces in Kakheti and 0 in Samegrelo does not reflect the culture of my peoples well, and is probably not very historical.
Also in Kakheti it is worth highlighting Lagodekhi, since large monasteries and villages have been located there since the 9th century, as well as in Nekresi

The game has to be balanced in one way or another.
Having too many wine provinces would reduce other resources and stunt the local economies.

And besides, wine is s huge cultural thing in all of Georgia.

I think having 2 in Kakheti to represent the fact that it is by far the biggest wine producing region makes sense.

Similarly with Lechkhumi. It arguably produces the best quality wine in the country and the popularity of the local varieties are on par with Kakhetian ones.

 

[Ispil]

And I suppose one more suggestion (seriously someone stop me): the Jalāli right in that bit of territory north of the Donboli but east of those northern Sutayid holdings. So, Bayazit, Maku, and those few long-named locations around Maku. Not Hadishahr.

Makes the overall border nice and smooth, and finishes out the warning to anyone who thinks trying to conquer the region is a good idea.

 

[SuperLexxe]

And I suppose one more suggestion (seriously someone stop me): the Jalāli right in that bit of territory north of the Donboli but east of those northern Sutayid holdings. So, Bayazit, Maku, and those few long-named locations around Maku. Not Hadishahr.

Makes the overall border nice and smooth, and finishes out the warning to anyone who thinks trying to conquer the region is a good idea.

This finishes the West probably as the most granular area on this map. Now if we can find something in the South and East

I know Fars has the Mongol Jurma'is and (Ughanis/Awghanis/Awganis) tribes. They wrecked havoc there and in Kirman as rogues, so probably landed ABCs. And there might've been other tribes as well.

Similiar tribes inhabited the Eretnids.

 

[dnarik]

I believe that having "desert" vegetation along Amu Darya is quite incorrect. Yes, it suffered A LOT from the Mongolian invasion, and so a lower amount of locations, just a strip along the river, makes sense, but it's definitely not a desert at all. it should be more akin to the Nile Delta area in many ways

 

[ZigTheNorweigan]

This finishes the West probably as the most granular area on this map. Now if we can find something in the South and East

I know Fars has the Mongol Jurma'is and (Ughanis/Awghanis/Awganis) tribes. They wrecked havoc there and in Kirman as rogues, so probably landed ABCs. And there might've been other tribes as well.

Similiar tribes inhabited the Eretnids.

Have you added it to your map? Also im curious whether you would do something for the Caucasus as well with your mapmaking its very good

 

[Lukagen]

I really like how much attention you have given to the Caucasian region, but there are some issues with Georgia.

Firstly some location names need to be changed. Tortum, Oltu, Ardahan and Ispir are Turkish names of historical Georgian towns called Tortomi, Oltisi, Artaani and Speri respectively. So I think that under Georgian rule they should be called so.

Same problem with the province Ciildir. Historically it was either called Tao-Klarjeti or Meshketi. Another problem with this province is that it is a part of the Armenian highlands area, meanwhile it should be a part of Georgia. This region is the start point of Georgian unification in 9-10th century by the hands of the Bagrationi dynasty and has mostly been under their rule since. So it doesn't really make sense to not count them in the area of Georgia.

Also according to H. F. B. Lynch, the maker of the map on the right (idk who he is.), geographically it makes more sense that this province isn't a part of the Armenian plateau, but Samtskhe is. In conclusion if we look at both history and geography province of Ciildir should be a part of Georgia and should have a Georgian name under their rule.

There's a problem with the political state too.
Georgia should most definitely not be a part of the Ilkhanate in 1337 since George V made the country free from them in the decade just before.

And most of the province of Ciildir should be a part of Samtskhe and not Georgia and Samtskhe should be a vassal of Georgia with their title being atabeg.

Red part is Samtskhe in the first quarter of XIV century. I didn't see anything about any land being lost between 1325 and 1337. Right map is my poor attempt to draw the borders. I don't have Rize included, but according to the map it should be. I don't know exactly how correct this map is, just saw it on the wiki, but i guess there must be some truth behind it. I just ask you to take a look at this part of the map again.

Sorry for using only wiki as my source. I can't reply when i put up links, so no links

 

[SuperLexxe]

Have you added it to your map? Also im curious whether you would do something for the Caucasus as well with your mapmaking its very good

On my WIP map right now.

For Caucasus I'm rly waiting for some concrete info, with a showcase of locations or borders, like the post above is pretty good. I don't get too deep into posts that are very vague.

 

[lazprune]

correct me if I’m wrong but weren’t there only one Jewish group in Iraq?

I was talking about all Jewish groups herein but for Iraq there is an Arabic-speaking group and a Kurdish speaking group IIRC.

 

[Bitcoin_op]

@pavia you said nothing interesting is about many of the dynasties , but the elephant in the room ( to me at least ) is the bavnavids who are in the ck games represented as part of the sassanid dynasty , do you think we can considering the implementation of characters in project Caesar , either a ; trace our lineage back to the Sassanids or b ; maybe have a way to if we reform Persia change our name to Sassanids along with dynasty. Would add some great flavor to a very prestigious house .

 

[crowdemon]

Good breakdown of the region.

 

[racnes]

I really like how much attention you have given to the Caucasian region, but there are some issues with Georgia.

Firstly some location names need to be changed. Tortum, Oltu, Ardahan and Ispir are Turkish names of historical Georgian towns called Tortomi, Oltisi, Artaani and Speri respectively. So I think that under Georgian rule they should be called so.

View attachment 1188365View attachment 1188367

Same problem with the province Ciildir. Historically it was either called Tao-Klarjeti or Meshketi. Another problem with this province is that it is a part of the Armenian highlands area, meanwhile it should be a part of Georgia. This region is the start point of Georgian unification in 9-10th century by the hands of the Bagrationi dynasty and has mostly been under their rule since. So it doesn't really make sense to not count them in the area of Georgia.

View attachment 1188377
View attachment 1188375
View attachment 1188379View attachment 1188381

Also according to H. F. B. Lynch, the maker of the map on the right (idk who he is.), geographically it makes more sense that this province isn't a part of the Armenian plateau, but Samtskhe is. In conclusion if we look at both history and geography province of Ciildir should be a part of Georgia and should have a Georgian name under their rule.
View attachment 1188371View attachment 1188373View attachment 1188374
There's a problem with the political state too.
Georgia should most definitely not be a part of the Ilkhanate in 1337 since George V made the country free from them in the decade just before.
View attachment 1188378
And most of the province of Ciildir should be a part of Samtskhe and not Georgia and Samtskhe should be a vassal of Georgia with their title being atabeg.
View attachment 1188383
View attachment 1188384View attachment 1188391
Red part is Samtskhe in the first quarter of XIV century. I didn't see anything about any land being lost between 1325 and 1337. Right map is my poor attempt to draw the borders. I don't have Rize included, but according to the map it should be. I don't know exactly how correct this map is, just saw it on the wiki, but i guess there must be some truth behind it. I just ask you to take a look at this part of the map again.

Sorry for using only wiki as my source. I can't reply when i put up links, so no links

Rize should be controlled by Samsthke-Georgia too: https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/threads/tinto-maps-7-anatolia-feedback.1702644/post-29872811

Though its not better than a historical document, you can see most of the maps agree with that too

 

[ValhallArchitect]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caspian_Flotilla

View attachment 1187499

Thanks for the information, it's helpful.

Though I can't help but notice the bottom half of the quote. "from 1813, it remained the only military flotilla in the Caspian sea". And from the wiki link, with a size under 40 ships at its apex.
1. I do wonder in terms of gameplay if it's really worth it to have a flotilla for a single country in a enclosed sea.
2. Most of the nations around the caspian can't reasonably develop a marine. Firstly because they have limited economic resource, secondly because they have no wood (apart from Persia and the Caucasian region, central Asian turks don't have access to significant forests).
3. In terms of AI ; and that's probably my biggest concern : will the AI be capable to understand when it's worth it and when it's not worth it anymore to develop a fleet in these waters. Woulnd't Russia put to much emphasis on this sea compared to the disadvantage of its other coastal defenses ? (Baltic / Black Sea / White Sea and Okhotshk sea, each one being relatively equivalent in terms of size / number of connected provinces). Wouldn't small central asian nations put to much emphasis on a navy, which would mean spending valuable coin for infrastructure / land army into a navy with limited interests outputs).

As a comparison, I would quote the American War of Independence and the British American War, which also saw limited navies (less than 30 of all sizes) battling over Lake Champlain. Yet, from the early provincial maps of the whole world we saw, I don't recall seeing "navigable lakes" with subdivision provinces in the dev diary ?
The British Are coming
Lake Champlain battle

 

[ingoli]

The game has to be balanced in one way or another.
Having too many wine provinces would reduce other resources and stunt the local economies.

And besides, wine is s huge cultural thing in all of Georgia.

I think having 2 in Kakheti to represent the fact that it is by far the biggest wine producing region makes sense.

Similarly with Lechkhumi. It arguably produces the best quality wine in the country and the popularity of the local varieties are on par with Kakhetian ones.

in this case, Georgian culture needs a modifier for wine production

 

[SuperLexxe]

---

Khaf, Kashan & Qum

(While they are mentioned to be ruled by rebels, I have no idea where Qalʿa-iĀwaral and the fortress of Gīw are)

"Trajectories of State Formation across Fifteenth-Century Islamic West-Asia" (2020):

---

 

[Inzano]

This map could help in deciding on the formation of provinces and possibly even the division of Georgia into several areas.

 

[CrabHelmet]

I have some sympathy with the devs about how to portray the Iranian cultural spectrum. Giving critique is made more difficult because we still haven't had the Dev Diary on culture, so it is very difficult to say what exactly the criteria are for splitting cultures and what the gameplay effects of various different cultures are. Judging by most of the previous culture maps for other areas, it seems Paradox has decided to err on the side of following linguistic boundaries very closely. For Europe, this is understandable - language largely formed the basis for the emergence of nationalism and national identities in Europe were usually (if not exclusively, c.f. Switzerland) built on the basis of a common language or the imposition of a common language. It seems to me that it becomes less and less useful a concept as you move away from Europe. A very easy example here would be the Zaza-Gorani languages not being mutual intelligble with other languages belonging to the Kurds, and in fact not especially closely related in the grand scheme of things, and yet speakers of Zaza and Gorani clearly and proudly identifying as Kurdish (and being accepted as such by oher Kurds).

Nevertheless, following the language scheme, some observations:

1) Persian extends too far north. In particular, the area around Tehran in this period would have been speaking a dialect very close to that spoken in the areas currently marked as Adhari. You can see the remnants of this marked here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talysh_language#/media/File:Caspian_languages.png , which in turn cites Perso-Tabaric Dialects in the Language Transition Zone Bordering Mazandaran, H. Borjian (2013). Persian would expand to that region under the Qajars from the late 1700s, when Tehran was made the capital, creating an influx of more orthodox Persian speakers and suppressing and diminishing the local dialects. The provinces of Qazvin and Rey should be largely Adhari in this period.

2) The distinction between Persian, Khorasani, and Tajik cultures is difficult, but I'm not convinced the current map is the right answer. All of these areas featured settled agricultural peoples who would have had local dialects but spoke Persian/Farsi as a bridging language, and largely would have been able to understand each other. Most of these local dialects have not survived to the modern period as anything other than accents of Farsi, or are poorly attested (see, for example, what we have left of the Median or Central Plateau dialects). On a language basis, you would arguably have a single "Persian" bloc extending from Qom to Balkh. There are probably gameplay reasons this would be undesirable, although again, without knowing how Paradox sees culture and what the gameplay consequences are, it is hard to say.

If Persian does have to be broken up, there are probably two approximate ways to do it. One is to use a very broad-brush approach, and just go with Persian and Khorasani, with Persian being everything to the south and west of the Dasht-e Lut and Dasht-e Kavir. For the purposes of Paradox's current map, that means turning everything that is currently marked Tajik into Khorasani, and also expanding Khorasani to the south a bit, to eat up those bits of Persian which protrude across the two salt deserts. This is the conceptual Greater Khorasan, and mimics the way that, in practice, many Iranian polities formed their borders. It is the core Persian-speaking lands of, in turn, the Tahirids, then the Saffarids, then the Samanids, the Ghaznavids, the Ghurids, and the Khwarazmians before the game-start, showing the relative durability of this area as a social concept with institutions that oulasted successive polities, and then during the game period, it ended up being the last bastion of the surviving Timurid princes after they were driven out of western Iran, and formed the disputed zone between the Khanate of Bukhara and the Safavids that spawned a good 250 years of warfare covering most of the game's time period.

The other would be to try and fragment Persian more, perhaps to encourage fragmentation or fit with other gameplay objectives. If that were the case, then the sensible way to do it would probably be to use major cities as bases for rough cultural zones of influence, as was often the case in the period. You could have as rough groups Farsi, Kermani, Isfahani, Sistani, Khorasani (in the restricted sense, meaning the area that is roughly bounded and containing Merv, Balkh, Herat, and Nishapur), and so on. I would stress that I see the first option as preferable, but if the cultures absolutely need to be broken up, this would seem the preferable way to do it in my view.

What I don't think is tenable is the current three-way split of Persian, Khorasani, and Tajik. In 1337, the split between Khorasani and Tajik portrayed by the cultural map doesn't exist. That cultural division was created by in large part by Russian occupation right at the end of, and after, the period covered by the game.

3) Afghan should probably be changed to Pashtun. Both are in reasonably common usage in the present era, but Afghan is firstly an exonym and secondly is now also often used as a nationality rather than an ethnic identity (e.g. references to the Hazara as Afghans in the sense that they are citizens of Afghanistan). Pashtun arguably extends too far to the west. For example, Farah is marked as largely Pashtun, but in the period Farah was largely Persian-speaking (https://iranicaonline.org/articles/farah-), until the conquest by Dost Mohammed, when it was repopulated following significant population decline as trade had found alternative routes. Pushing Pashtun back into Zaranj Province would likely be a more accurate reflection. Lashkargah was likely nearer the rough contact line of the Persian and Pashtun cultural zones - Lashkargah itself means "army barracks" in Persian, likely with Saffarid origins and reflecting where troops needed to be stationed to maintain control of the local population.

4) The Ahwari (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marsh_Arabs) are apparently not present in Iraq. Although the Ahwari do not speak a particularly distinct dialect to those around them, they do have a long history of distinct cultural practices which led them to often be persecuted, and were certainly seen as "other" by other Iraqis. A reasonably strong case to be made here to depart from the simple "language = culture" model.

5) I am not really sure what Khorezmian is supposed to represent. If it is the Iranic culture that formed much of the administrative muscle of the Khwarezmian state, then it simply should not exist to anywhere near that extent. The Mongol conquest was one of the most brutal conflicts in the pre-modern era and the scale of the human devastation is hard to overstate. The Iranian Khorezmians were killed in such large numbers and the area so heavily overrun by Turkic peoples that by 1337 there would be only a small minority left in almost any given area. The city of Gurganj was subjected to what in the modern era we can only really describe as genocide and the city was razed to the ground in its entirety. To the extent there are Iranic peoples in much of this area, they would arguably simply have been absorbed into the Persian-Dari continuum and best represented as just more Khorasani culture pops.

6) Minorities. It is hard to tell from this map, but there should be liberally scattered around much of greater Iran, Khorasan, and Transoxiana a whole bunch of different cultures and peoples left from various waves of conquest and migration. In particular - central Asian Arab communities, who arrived in the aftermath of the conquest in the 7th-9th centuries in large numbers, and were particularly numerous in what is today Tajikistan; Mongols, to which I defer to this utterly excellent post (https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/foru...-2024-persia-caucasus.1703150/post-29878892); various Jewish communities; and also generally the cultural boundaries particularly in the east look a lot cleaner than they should and would generally be assisted by becoming much more messy.

 

[GeorgeVVBush]

Considering how granular and clustered the cultures have become (I think such level of subdivision is kind of unnecessary, but anyways) I wonder how cultures will function at all and how will culture define whether it's closer or not. Like obviously, Georgian, Svan Mingrelian and Laz would be "brother cultures" of sort, but how about, let's say these Georgian cultures and Armenian, Pontic, Cappadocia, Greek, etc, that were historically close with eachother. Will there be some mechanism that these cultures will consider each other as kindred or something compared to more alien cultures like levantine or Irish? Will it be something like Victoria III, where cultures have hard set modifiers, or will it be relatively more dynamic system like CK III and cultural acceptance?

 

[Em Ay Ef]

Why would I want to build ships in the caspian? Also, does the ai understand that ships built there can't be used elsewhere? Will ships in the caspian count towards a nations overall "naval strength"? For example in eu4 colonies could gain liberty desire if they had a stronger navy than you, if that's still the case (or something similar) will ships in the caspian not count towards that calculation, or could I keep people scared of a landlocked navy?

Maritime presence in Astrakhan market, for example. And yes, we have made it a sea because we have planned that we can get those issues solved with the current game systems, otherwise we wouldn't, and would have stayed as lake/s.

Does this mean that North American Great Lakes will count as seas as well? No opinion on this, just asking.

And regarding seas, Basra doesn't have sea access despite being a bustling port (even if shallow-water). Would you consider repeating the Seville Stunt and making Shatt al-Arab navigable up to a certain point?



(And I do remember my promise to go through locations in Poland. Trying to set time aside to finish this task, I'm more or less halfway through. Keeping my suggestion to minor ones, mostly names with some terrain and goods here and there.)

 

[Bisonmask]

One more suggestion (also can be included in @SuperLexxe's map): Merv should be a country in itself, a vassal of the Kartids:

View attachment 1188159
(Makhan being a village just outside of Merv, though later passages indicate that their control included Merv proper). They're a rather significant figure, in that Timur would oftentimes (when ousted from the rest of the Ulus) hang out here and get help from nearby powers (Kartids, Jaun'i Qurban) to make his comeback.

Also just for context, it's not like Timur was just swept to power. He was ousted from the Chaghatai Ulus several times over, by Moghulistan, or Amir Husayn. It was an absolute struggle for him to gain control, and also a struggle to keep it. Once he solidified his rule, then he went and conquered the whole place, but getting to that point was by no means trivial.

"Oh, Timur is now in control!" is absolutely not how things should go. You need to fight for it.

This speaks to something about how ABCs should work in general. They should be able to fight and lose far more wars much closer together and survive than settled states. Iirc Timur's successors had similar issues with the Jalayirids and obviously Chinggis Khan was on both sides of that reality during his rise to power. If they all disappear after a single war or, worse, are crippled by a single war like most states in EU4 are, there won't be any push and pull in fighting hordes

 

[giorgi1999]

in this case, Georgian culture needs a modifier for wine production

I'm not sure there are cultural modifiers