• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.

Tinto Maps #19 - 20th of September 2024 - India

Hello everyone, and welcome once again to another Tinto Maps! Today we will be taking a look at India! Yup, a whole subcontinent… Exciting!

Let me say a foreword before I start sharing with you some beautiful maps. Some of you may wonder why we decided to make the entire Indian subcontinent in just one DD, instead of spreading it a bit. There are two reasons for that. The first is the political situation: the Sultanate of Delhi is at its zenith, under Muhammad bin Tughlaq. You will soon see that it rules over more than half of the region, approximately; so splitting that polity into several DDs would have felt weird.

The other is that we felt that a more cohesive approach made sense in this region, as it’s sooo diverse compared to others, that the way we approached it, both for its setup and content, was from the generic to the particular; therefore, we think that it will also help us more when we tackle the review of the region. Speaking of that, don’t worry much about the time available to prepare suggestions; you may already know that we have a backlog of several regions, and therefore weeks, before we hit the Indian review, so you will have plenty of time to research and prepare them. In any case, as it’s a massive task (we know it firsthand), we’ll let you know a bit in advance when we plan to start the in-depth review of it, so you have time to wrap it up.

As a final say, I just want to mention that an old acquaintance of the community, @Trin Tragula , now Design Lead in CK3, helped us to map a big chunk of it. Thanks, mate! And now, maps!

Countries:
Countries.jpg

Colored Wastelands.png

As I just mentioned, the Sultanate of Delhi is at its zenith, under Muhammad bin Tughlaq, extending through the Indo-Gangetic Plain, including Bengal, and to the south, throughout the Deccan. There we have its toughest contender, Vijayanagar, a county that is a bulwark of Hinduism. Other important countries around it are Orissa and Sindh, but much smaller countries generally surround Delhi. You might wonder how it would be possible to stop Delhi from completely controlling the region, then. For this, two things are affecting its capability to achieve it. The first is the base game mechanics: ruling over so many different cultures and religions with low control will be hard. The second is a Situation that involves the Fall of the Sultanate; if Delhi wants to succeed, it will have to fight back against rebellions, which involves the potential independence of the Bengalese countries or newborn ones such as the Bahmanis, and the multiple Indian states around it, which are ready to take over it.

Dynasties:
Dynasties.jpg


Locations:
Locations.jpg

Locations 2.jpg

Locations 3.jpg

Locations 4.jpg
Yes, we are making some adjustments to the coloring of the mapmodes!

Provinces:
Provinces.jpg

Provinces 2.jpg

Provinces 3.jpg

Provinces 4.jpg

Areas:
Areas.jpg

The bug is still there, yes… The area that is to the southwest is Malabar.

Terrain:
Climate.jpg

Topography.jpg

Vegetation.jpg

Here we have a new type of topography: Atolls. We added it some months ago, as we worked on finishing the map of the Pacific Ocean, and it will be the last one added to the game.

Development:
Development.jpg

A new map mode is born! Here you have the development of India. The most developed place is Delhi, which is part of the fertile Gangetic Plain.

Harbors:
Harbors.jpg


Cultures:
Cultures.jpg

Cultures 2.jpg

Cultures 3.jpg
Not an entirely new map, but a glorious one. We chose it to be the one to present how the different cultures could be present in the game for a reason.

Religions:
Religions.jpg

Religions 2.jpg

Religions 3.jpg
India is the birthplace of numerous religions, and that needs to be reflected in the religious map. The main religion is Hinduism, but don’t be deceived by its homogeneous look, as it will be quite deep feature-wise. We also have Buddhism, which is at a low point, after some centuries of prosecutions. Mahayana is a majority in Sindh, although that's not completely exact, as an earlier form of Buddhism was practiced there; we’re also not 100% convinced about it being a majority, as some sources and accounts set the Islamization of the region to be completed under the Ghaznavids, in the 11th and 12th century, while others delay it until the 14th century - we followed the later approach, but we're very open to feedback in this specific matter. Another form of Buddhism is Theravada, which is the most practiced religion in Sailan. Some interesting minorities present in the region are Jains (yellow stripes), Nestorians (the pink stripe in Malabar, which portrays the ‘Saint Thomas Christians’), Jews (which have their own separate culture, ‘Kochini’), and several Animist confessions, of which we’ve already split Satsana Phi, the traditional religion of Tai people, and Sanamahism, the religion of Meitei people. Oh, although it’s not strictly part of the region, the light blue stripes to the north is Bön religion.

Raw Materials:
Raw Materials.jpg

Raw Materials 2.jpg

Raw Materials 3.jpg

Raw Materials 4.jpg
India was for some time in the period the wealthiest region of the world, one of the main reasons being that it’s incredibly rich in very different types of resources, including some of the expensive ones. That will make for a very interesting economic gameplay.

Markets:
Markets India.png

There are several market centers in India that we think portray well the situation in 1337: Kabul (yes, it’s in Afghanistan, but it’s one for the area of Kashmir), Delhi, Khambat, Calicut, Pulicat, Varanasi, and Chittagong.

Population:
Population.jpg

Population 2.jpg

Population 3.jpg

Population 4.jpg

Population 5.jpg

Population 10.jpg

Population 9.jpg

Population 6.jpg

Population 7.jpg

Population 8.jpg

India has a big population. To be precise, around 95M pops. Delhi is the second largest country in the world in population, with 41M pops, which makes it a behemoth, with very serious governance challenges. I’m also showing this week the progress we’re making with the coloring of the population mapmode; the stripes on several locations mark that they’re overpopulated, as they have more pops living on them than the pop capacity available (something that may be reviewed, as balancing very densely populated regions such as India or China is really challenging).

And that’s all for today! We hope you enjoyed this massive Tinto Maps. Next week we will be taking a look at the Steppe. Which one, you might wonder? Well, the one ruled by the Golden Horde, from Ukraine in the west to Mongolia in the east. Cheers!
 
  • 120Like
  • 98Love
  • 3
  • 3
  • 1
Reactions:
Can you share some sources that support a pre-Ajay Pal unification of Garhwal? Most sources I've seen support the idea of there being warring principalities from the collapse of the Katyuris to until Ajay Pal's unification of Garhwal, instead of any unified Garhwali state, decentralized or not.
View attachment 1277141

Unless your sources provide strict chronologies, I don't see why Ajay Pal's battle with Kumaon couldn't have just happened just after his annexation of Badhan Garh, though if they do provide actual chronologies that's a different story.

Also, there were invasions of Garhwal that occurred every now and then, the most recent one being by Krachalla's Khasa Kingdom in the 1200s.
This lists a lot of sources- http://www.royalark.net/India/tehri.htm & https://www.tribuneindia.com/news/archive/community/pivot-of-state-s-history-tehri-garhwal-196215/

As for me, I am primarily using the Panwaras that I have heard through the Aujis. So it is oral history, therefore should be taken with some grains of salt, although most of the history that we have about Himalayan regions is through oral traditions as its history was written very late, using these very sources.

As for the invasions, yes I am not denying that, the only thing is that none could keep it under their rule for a significant time. One would think that it would be easier for Kumaon to occupy Painkhanda and for Sirmour/Nahan to have Rawain than a Garh located so far away.

The reason I now believe that Chandpur could not have had a complete suzerainty over Badhan at that point is due to the existence of Topal Garh in between them. There is a narrow pass that leads from Chandpur Garh to Badhan Garh, but on that pass lies Topal Garh, for Chandpur to have control over Badhan, they must have control over Topal Garh too, which would not make sense, as Topal Garh was the first Garh to make and install artillery in their fort, which does not make any sense if it was in the internals of Garhwal and already under somebody else's control.


Note: The Tribune article contains a section about Kanak Pal and Bhanu Pratap, which although is a very popular thing, I believe to be incorrect, mainly because a historian/chronicler of Garhwal (possibly Atma Ram Gairola) sent a correspondence to the Malwa Royal Court asking them if their lineage had any prince named Kanak Pal, to which the court declined. In my opinion, the Parmar dynasty was a native Khas clan that adopted Rajput title during the process of Sanskritisation of the mountains to claim legitimacy.
 
Last edited:
  • 1
Reactions:
they must have control over Topal Garh too, which would not make sense, as Topal Garh was the first Garh to make and install artillery in their fort, which does not make any sense if it was in the internals of Garhwal and already under somebody else's control.
I mean, Top Garh did eventually fall to Ajay Pal anyways by the end of his campaigns, right? I can't find any indication it remained independent from the Garhwal Kingdom after Ajay Pal. I think the most likely scenario here is that Top Garh perhaps had a different name early on in its history, and was later renamed to Top Garh after the introduction of cannons to India. I don't see why the nobles of the fort couldn't have installed cannons whilst under the larger Kingdom of Garhwal later on in the 16th or 17th centuries. tbh, I doubt the word तोप had even been introduced to Garhwali yet, given that it was a loanword from the Ottomans, which then passed to Persian, and then finally passed to Indian languages. I think Occam's Razor would still just suggest that Ajay Pal just conquered both Top Garh and Badhan Garh first (alternatively perhaps there could have been a temporary coalition of a few Garhs against Kumaon, but even if that was the case I don't think that warrants a dedicated permanent Garhwali IO when we already have mechanics to represent coalitions), and then fought Kumaon.
 
Last edited:
  • 1
Reactions:
I mean, Top Garh did eventually fall to Ajay Pal anyways by the end of his campaigns, right? I can't find any indication it remained independent from the Garhwal Kingdom after Ajay Pal. I think the most likely scenario here is that Top Garh perhaps had a different name early on in its history, and was later renamed to Top Garh after the introduction of cannons to India. I don't see why the nobles of the fort couldn't have installed cannons whilst under the larger Kingdom of Garhwal later on in the 16th or 17th centuries. tbh, I doubt the word तोप had even been introduced to Garhwali yet, given that it was a loanword from the Ottomans, which then passed to Persian, and then finally passed to Indian languages. I think Occam's Razor would still just suggest that Ajay Pal just conquered both Top Garh and Badhan Garh first (alternatively perhaps there could have been a temporary coalition of a few Garhs against Kumaon, but even if that was the case I don't think that warrants a dedicated permanent Garhwali IO when we already have mechanics to represent coalitions).
Oh yeah, amongst all that I overlooked that obvious detail. o_O

Btw, now that we are in the realm of speculation, why do you think then these minor "kingdoms" managed to remain independent from these much larger foes but not from a Garh of similar size and situation?
 
Btw, now that we are in the realm of speculation, why do you think then these minor "kingdoms" managed to remain independent from these much larger foes but not from a Garh of similar size and situation?
A lot of it probably stemmed from an overall lack of incentive to actually invest the resources into conquering, subduing, and occupying Garhwal. The rough terrain would probably make long-term occupations by foreign powers difficult as well.
 
I wish there were mechanics to simulate the strength and resilience of the Malabar kingdoms. Vijayanagar Empire never successfully got into the whole of Kerala due to the terrain. Dutch, Portuguese, and British invasions constantly failed even via the sea routes due to their naval superiority. A mix of mountains+Jungles along with more impassable terrain representing the western ghats should provide a natural barrier to Vij blobbing, but I also want mechanics, advances, and government reforms to simulate the economic and defensive prowess of the Malabar Kings, particularly the Samoothiri of Kozhikode (Calicut) and Rajya of Kochin among others. It shouldn't be easy breezy for a South Indian campaign playing as the Bahamanis, Vijayanagar, or even the Ma'bar sultanate to just trailblaze through Kerala as it is in EU4.

This idea actually extends to a lot of the smaller centralized kingdoms of India, like the Garjati tribal states, Various rajput kings and the himalayan states who mostly retained their territories under changing major powers, either remaining independent or becoming vassals. They never got annexed and changed hands from the Tughlaqs to the Sayyids to the Lodis to the Mughals to the Marathas and then to the British. I don't want a 5-way Indian blob in every playthrough with all minor powers wiped off the map in 50 years. They play a major role in framing the shifting alliances and networks that caused the rise and fall of empires in this subcontinent.

Moreover, European campaigns won't be fun anymore if I reach India in the 1600s and see 4 big empires in the 4 cardinal directions and no small kingdoms to establish trading partnerships with. This is an issue in EU4 as well, with the trade protectorate subject type - I never have small enough nations in India to make into trade protectorates by the time I get there because of blobbing. I hope this can be fixed through mechanics or just scripted AI behavior. Railroading is sometimes really needed for immersion and gameplay - not just for the sake of historicity.
 
  • 5
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Chhattisgarh Rework:

I decided to do a rework for Chhattisgarh. Feel free to provide feedback if anybody has something to add.

Political:
1743970465822.png

1743970498966.png

1: Bastar (Kakatiya dynasty)
2: Kanker (Som dynasty) [Vassal of Ratnapura]
3: Ratnapura (Kalachuri/Haihaya dynasty)
4: Dhamdha (Raj Gond dynasty) [Vassal of Ratnapura]
5: Kawardha (Naga dynasty) [Vassal of Ratnapura]
6: Sarangarh (Raj Gond dynasty) [Vassal of Ratnapura]
7: Palamu (Raksel dynasty)
8: Sidhi (Baland dynasty)

The foothills of the Maikal Range were apparently under a variety of zamindars and vassal chiefs, outside of Ratnapur's direct control. I decided to just represent the most major vassals I could find information on (if Tinto wants to add more granularity, they should feel free to look through the sources I linked, there is more information in them). I'm not exactly sure when Gond rule started in Dhamdha, but I assume they would have been ruling already by 1337. Most of the rest of the political map stayed the same (I'm not really sure on the exact borders of Sarangarh and Palamu, so I just left them as you guys drew them), with the exception of adding the Sidhis of Baland.

Ratnapur should also have an event where they have the possibility of splitting in half (into separate Ratnapur and Raipur Kingdoms) near the end of the 14th century.

Locations:
1743971932592.png

1743971945299.png

1: Narayanpal
2: Barasuru
3: Bastar
4: Jagdalpur
5: Dantewada
6: Bhopalpatnam
7: Bhairamgarh
8: Injaram
9: Sukma
10: Kondagaon
11: Bhongapal
12: Paralkor
13: Kakayara
14: Ambagarh
15: Ghotia
16: Dhamtari
17: Rajim
18: Sirpur
19: Raipur
20: Tilda
21: Durg
22: Nandgram
23: Khairagarh
24: Amora/Amoda
25: Kawardha
26: Boriya
27: Nawagarh
28: Paragaon
29: Pasid
30: Ratanpur
31: Malhar/Mallar
32: Shivrinarayan/Sheorinaraya
33: Daikoni/Dahkoni OR Sarkhon OR Akaltara (all were important settlements during the time period, any would work)
34: Lapha OR Pali (all were important settlements during the time period, any would work)
35: Tummana
36: Kenda
37: Bilaigarh
38: Sarangarh
39: Basna
40: Bhadwahi
41: Ambikapur
42: Dipadih
43: Dhamdha (note that this was a last minute addition, so it doesn't feature in my vegetation or terrain maps)

I increased the location density of the fertile plains of central Chhattisgarh to put it at the same density of my other reworks.

Population:

The population of Chhattisgarh's central plains seem surprisingly low to me, especially compared to other regions of India. By the turn of the 20th century the area of modern day Chhattisgarh had a population higher than British Ceylon (4.18 million vs. 3.56 million respectively), and while I know 20th century populations aren't always directly applicable to medieval times, it does a good job of giving us an estimate I'd say. Also, Bastar and Palamu combined having a population comparable to Ratnapur is kind of strange to me. I'd say add about 100,000 new pops spread out throughout Ratnapur's borders, and then after that redistribute more existing pops from other areas (from Raksel and Baster) into the central plains of Chhattisgarh, with the goal of pushing Ratnapur's population up to at least around 700k. Even today, you can see that most Chhattisgarhis live in the central plains, that trend would have been even more severe back in medieval times before much of the jungled regions of the peripheries were settled.

1743973023658.png



Vegetation:
1743973267950.png

1743973280765.png


The color scheme is identical to the one I used for my Odisha rework. I'm not really sure what the difference between forest and jungle is meant to be in EU5, so I didn't distinguish in my map.

Terrain:
1743973386424.png

I also tried my hand at a terrain map with my new locations, mostly based off of Sulphurologist's maps with a few tweaks here and there.

Cultures:
1743985192263.png

Sitapur should be majority Nagpuri with a Chhattisgarhi minority
1743985308964.png


Settlements:
1743973484833.png

Just in case its helpful, I decided to include the exact locations of settlements my new locations are named after.

Sources:
1743973571687.png

1743973636560.png

1743973666784.png

1743973804794.png
 
Last edited:
  • 5Like
  • 3Love
  • 1
Reactions:
Cultures:
View attachment 1277745
Sitapur should be majority Nagpuri with a Chhattisgarhi minority
View attachment 1277746

Has anyone come to a conclusive terminology for the Chattisgarhi cultural identity? I mean using census data from the 21st century is fine for getting a general idea but Chattisgarhi as an identity, let alone a language or culture was not even starting to take shape until the Marathi rule in the area (which was then starting to be called Chattisgarh).

I still don't think neologies like Chattisgarhi or Assamese should exist in the game, if "Dutch" and "Walloon" don't exist in the game. It's not just about the name of the culture - its also the fact that these cultures didnt arise yet. To represent the indo-aryan stock of this region, I feel like Kosali (in reference to Dakshin Kosala, the previous name of this region) would make more sense. OR we can just use Ratnapuri, as the Kingdom based out of the Ratnapur at this point encompassed almost the entirety of what the "Chattisgarhi" culture represents in the game.

My vote is for Kosali - as the Kalachuris of Ratnapura called their kingdom "Mahakosal" (Great Kosal, the great was just for prestige purposes, they weren't all that). The term fits and will continue to be relevant late into the game's timeframe until the Bhonsle Marathas decide to bring the entire region under their rule through the Nagpur state, and start calling the region Chattisgarh (and the people, chattisgarhi). The other option is a bit more restrictive in my opinion.
 
  • 3Like
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
A lot of it probably stemmed from an overall lack of incentive to actually invest the resources into conquering, subduing, and occupying Garhwal. The rough terrain would probably make long-term occupations by foreign powers difficult as well.
I don't think that fully captures it unfortunately. While that could and probably would have been the reason for the Delhi based empires, that does not really make sense for Himachali kingdoms and Kumaon as these regions were similar in geography and Rawain valley has abundant mineral resources like Gold, Iron, Copper, etc and Niti, Mana passes were the routes of the very lucrative Indo-Tibetan trade. In fact these two regions were a major part behind Garhwal's prosperity and both of them directly border or are very close to Himachal and Kumaon respectively.

And again, the Panwadas do indicate, although this is only circumstantial evidence, to there being an spanning polity called Kedarkhand.

Edit: Also, the texts written before the 14-15th century call this region as Kedarkhand, mentioning "Kedare Khas Mandale", i.e., Kedarkhand, abode of the Khasas. One thing to note here is the use of word "Mandal", which as you would know was used for signifying administrative divisions or polities. The "Gram-Rajya", local administrative division of each village also used the word Mandal for itself. Thus strengthening my belief of there being an overarching polity!
 
Last edited:
Oh yeah one more thing, the name Garhwal itself emerges in the early 16th century, before that the united kingdom (hehe uk/uttarakhand) was known by the name of Kedarkhand, also the king of Chandpur Garh was known as "Bulanda Badri", that is, representative of Lord Badrinath, which was not in their jurisdiction, indicating a more widespread influence than their direct control.
 
Rajasthan Rework:

Rajasthan is roughly the size of modern-day Germany in terms of area, and it has historically had a similar level of fragmentation as the HRE. On top of that, I imagine Rajasthan will be one of the most played regions in South Asia (given that I assume a lot of players will want to play Mewar or some other Rajput state and unite Rajputana), so its important to make sure its fleshed out in my opinion.

Countries:
1744243006858.png
1744237046600.png

1744243032064.png


(Nainwa [#36] and Pirana [#37] were left off the first label map [I forgot to include them], so I labeled both in a separate map)


1: Bhatner (Bhatti dynasty)
2: Bhurupal (Johiya dynasty)
3: Kot Pallu (Sihag dynasty)
4: Dhansia (Sahu dynasty)
5: Bhadang (Saran dynasty)
6: Raisalana (Beniwal dynasty)
7: Sidhmukh (Kaswan dynasty)
8: Ludi (Puniya dynasty)
9: Kanjan (Chahar dynasty)
10: Dadrewa (Chauhan dynasty)
11: Bhanipura (Bhadu dynasty)
12: Shekhsar (Godara dynasty)
13: Pugal (Bhatti dynasty)
14: Riri (Jakhar dynasty)
15: Janglu (Sankhla dynasty)
16: Dhatarwal (Dhatri dynasty)
17: Gothra Bhukaran (Bhukar dynasty)
18: Narhar (Nehra dynasty)
19: Amber (Kachhwaha dynasty)
20: Maroth (Gaur dynasty)
21: Mewar (Sisodia dynasty)
22: Roon (Sankhla dynasty)
23: ? [I'm not sure what "Man." is supposed to represent, but I left it on the map assuming that the Tinto team did their research there]
24: Jaisalmer (Bhatti dynasty)
25: Marwar (Rathore dynasty)
26: Barmer (Chauhan dynasty)
27: Jalore (Songara Chauhan dynasty)
28: Nagarparkar (Sodha dynasty) [Tributaries of Marwar]
29: Sanchore (Chauhan dynasty)
30: Chandravati (Deora Chauhan dynasty)
31: Dungarpur (Sisodia dynasty)
32: Leedi (Sangwan dynasty)
33: Bundi (Meena dynasty)
34: Gagraon (Khichi Chauhan dynasty)
35: Delhi (Tughlaq dynasty)
36: Nainwa (Dahiya dynasty)
37: Pirana

Locations:
1744237658446.png

1744237668796.png

1744237679218.png


(The labeling is a bit different here as compared to my previous reworks, as I thought it'd be more efficient for me to just label the settlements directly. If you guys need any clarification feel free to ask me. Unlabeled settlements for the most part indicate preexisting locations)

I tried to add enough locations to ensure that the entirety of Rajasthan wouldn't just be full of locations over their population capacity.

1: Sidhmukh
2: Ludi ("Ludi Khuba" in Google Maps)
3: Dadrewa
4: Kanjan
5: Raisalana (modern-day Raslana)
6: Dhansia
7: Bhanipura
8: Bhadang ("Bharang" in Google Maps)
9: Riri
10: Shekhsar ("Sheikhsar" in Google Maps)
11: Suin
12: Rangmahal
13: Bhatner
14: Pugal
15: Narhar
16: Leedi
17: Runiya ("Runiya Barawas" in Google Maps)
18: Chugher (modern-day Anupgarh)
19: Ghusainsar
20: Janglu
21: Dhatri
22: Kalera Bas
23: Rawatsar
24: Mahajan
25: Ajmer
26: Sheo
27: Satto
28: Sojat
29: Bhinmal
30: Chandravati
31: Sanchore
32: Koliya
33: Bhitalavataka (modern-day Bhitwara)
34: Tamvavati (modern-day Dhanop)
35: Pilavahika
36: Kosana
37: Roon
38: Nachna
39: Kanod
40: Travani (modern-day Tiwari)
41: Deogarh
42: Bisalpur (Beesalpur on Google Maps)
43: Tonk
44: Dhaun Kalan
45: Pirana (Parana in Google Maps) (Independent)
46: Bassi
47: Nainwa
48: Deoli
49: Bagor
50: Bari Sadri
51: Bhindar
52: Jagpura
53: Pilibanga
54: Ramnagar (modern-day Sri Ganganagar)
55: Rania
56: Baran
57: Atru
58: Sagapattana (modern-day Sagwara)
59: Bari
60: Rajgarh
61: Dirghapur (modern-day Deeg)
62: Jawar (modern-day Zawar)
63: Maroth

Sources:
 

Attachments

  • 1744237025918.png
    1744237025918.png
    180,8 KB · Views: 0
Last edited:
  • 6Like
  • 3Love
Reactions:
The Khokhars of Pothohar should be added as an independent country. There should be content for the Khokhar raids in Punjab (they sacked Lahore in 1342 and 1394) and for Jasrat Khan Khokhar's rise. Perhaps this Khokhar content can be integrated into the Fall of Delhi situation.

Rough borders of Khokhar rule in 1337:
1744308603666.png


Map of Jasrat Khan's kingdom:
1744309146179.png
 
Last edited:
  • 3Like
Reactions: