• 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 #7 - 21st of June 2024 - Anatolia

Hello everyone, and welcome to the seventh edition of Tinto Maps! I am once again asking for your support back to the duty of showing a new region of the map of the super secret Project Caesar, which this week is Anatolia!

Countries:
Countries.jpg

A beautifully divided Anatolia! The disintegration of the Sultanate of Rûm in the 13th century, caused by the Mongol invasion, led to multiple Turkish Beyliks grabbing power over their area. Probably the strongest in 1337 is the Ottoman one, founded by the Turkoman leader Osman Ghazi, but there are other strong contenders such as the Eretnids, the Germiyanids, or the Karamanids, which will be fighting for hegemony over the region. You might also notice that the Byzantine Empire//Eastern Roman Empire//Basileía Rhōmaíōn//[insert here your favorite naming option] still holds a few positions in Anatolia, the most notable being the city of Philadelphia. Apart from them, other interesting countries in the region are the Despotate of Trebizond, held by the Komnenoi, the Armenian Kingdom of Cilicia, and, of course, The-country-known-in-another-IP-as-Hisn-Kayfa, the Ayyubid remnant in al-Jazira. And you might also notice some Genoese outposts, making them important players as well.

Dynasties:
Dynasties.png

The dynastic map is pretty straightforward, as a different dynasty rules each Beylik. We have fixed the issue with the random dynasty names, so no more weird 'the XXXX of XXXX' dynastic names anymore. To spice things up, we could maybe start a Byzantine discussion: Palaiologos, or Komnenos?

Locations:
Locations.jpg

As usual, please consider that dynamic location naming is not yet a thing in this region, and therefore the inconsistencies in the language used. As an additional note of caution, please don’t use the Aegean Islands as a reference or benchmark for comparison, as a review of them is something that we’ve got on our list of ‘to do’. You may be able to see that the location density in the region is gradual, from denser coastal regions to bigger inland ones.

Provinces:
Provinces.png

We have changed the coloring of the provinces, making them more different, and easier to understand, though. Apart from that, suggestions in this matter are welcomed, as usual.

Terrain:
Climate.jpg

Topography.jpg

Vegetation.jpg

The terrain in Anatolia is quite interesting and unique, as it’s composed of very different features: the central Anatolian Plateau, with a colder climate and more sparse vegetation, is opposed to the rugged and more forested coastlines to the north and south, while only having fluvial flatlands to the west, and in Cilicia (an area that always has been a choke point between Anatolia and Syria. And to the east, the territory becomes increasingly more mountainous, as it approaches the Caucasus.

Cultures:
Cultures.jpg

Anatolia is the first region of the Middle East with cultural and religious minorities added, just in time for this Tinto Maps, so we can have endless discussions about the divide between the Greek and Turkish cultures! Hurray! Now seriously, we’ve made what we think is the most accurate division for 1337, given the scarcity of data. The stripes point to a variation of the pop percentages in each location, from let’s say 70% of Greeks in Izmit or Bursa, to 80% of Turks in Ankara or Konya. We have also added some subdivisions of these cultures, with the Pontic and Cappadocian Greeks; and the Turkomans (you might note a majority of them around Sivas and Malatya), that portray more a ‘class//social grouping’ divide than an ethnic or language divide, as these Turkoman pops are always tribesmen, while we consider the settled population as Turkish. Other than that, we have a good amount of Armenians distributed between the areas of Cilicia and Armenia; Laz people to the north; and Kurds to the east (the brownish-greenish culture). Also, please ignore the chunk of Syria that appears, as the minorities there are not yet done.

Religions:
Religions.jpg

We’re back to interesting religious divisions! We have in Anatolia Orthodox, Sunni, Miaphysite, and Nestorian pops. And if you wonder what are those pink stripes in Thrace, they are a Paulician minority.

Raw Materials:
Raw Materials.jpg

There are some interesting materials distributed all over Anatolia, such as Alum (which was a main export to Italy, usually handled by the merchant republics), Silk, Marble, or Copper. And if you’re wondering about the Spices, they were previously Saffron.

Markets:
Markets.jpg

The market centers of the region are Constantinople to the west, Trebizond to the north, and Damascus to the south. Nothing speaks against a Turkish Beylik conquering one or all of them, or creating a new market center, probably in the middle of the Anatolian Plateau, although probably it will require some infrastructure to make it fully functional.

Location and Country Population:
Pops Locations.jpg

Pops Country.jpg

And populations. Byzantium has some edge over each of the Beylikz, but not if they ally with each other, or if they ally with its Balkanic rivals… Also, have I heard about a 66K Ayyubid challenge?

That’s all for today! We’ll most likely be uploading the French feedback results by the end of next week or at the start of the following one (as next week there's an important bank holiday for this company, Midsommar St. John's Day, and some people will be on vacation a few days), and in the meantime, we'll also be reading and answering your feedback about Anatolia. And next Friday, we will be taking a look at Russia. See you then!

PS: I had a flight today that was delayed, therefore the delay on the DD until an (interesting) hour in which I'll be available for replying.
 
  • 150Love
  • 136Like
  • 7
  • 4
  • 1
Reactions:
They did, in the sense that they considered themselves Caesars of Romans (Greek Orthodox population) within borders of Ottoman state. In the same way they also called themselves rulers of Arabia and Acem (Iran) and Sultan of Sultans and Khans of Khans. It was never about being specifically successors to Roman Empire as an entity but being sovereign of various peoples and lands. Similarly it wouldn't be too sensible to let Ottomans also form Arabia or Iran either despite their claim of rulership over those territories.

Basically specifically ascribing Roman succession to them narrows it down way too much to a particular descent to exclusion of everything else. They could be considered a successor to Roman Empire as they did succeed Roman state in Constantinople and inherited the important Patriarchate of Constantinople, as well as adapting some of their administrative methods but I don't think they can be considered the successor state to Romans to point of being able to somewhat revive Roman Empire when so much of their state traditions and institutions were based on Turco-Persianate, Turco-Mongol and Islamic precedent.
Rome is whatever people believe Rome is and the Ottomans used their claim to being the successor state of Rome to legitimize their rule just like any other state claiming to be the successor of Rome. This legitimacy draws its power from people believing it. If everyone believes a random city in China is the rightful heir to the Roman succession then it is the rightful Rome. We don't think the Ottoman claim is very powerful today but the contemporary elite of the Ottomans empire certainly did not have our point of view. The great many pashas and governors who hailed from Christian population of the empire did not see the Ottomans as foreigners but as themselves. Certainly this legitimacy partly derived from the Ottoman claim to being the successors to Rome. If the Ottomans had conquered Rome and half of Italy as well, their claim would have been much more powerful.

Perhaps to solve this never ending debate over who is the rightful heir to the Roman Empire, we could have an international claim mechanic in the following way: Each state/ruler which claims the title of Rome/Caeser has a kind of legitimacy to his/her claim. Claiming this title with little legitimacy to the claim may give some penalties as then everyone would claim the title of Caeser. If this legitimacy is high then maybe there might be certain bonuses/penalties or extra actions available. Holding certain cities, having certain laws or being of certain culture/religion would give strength to the claim. In principle you can extend this Legacy of X mechanic to other fallen empires such as the Seljuks, the Golden Horde (if it falls) or any other fallen great state. Regardless, I think that if such a mechanic is not implemented I think the whole debate about who is the rightful heir to the Roman Empire is quite unimportant for the game.
 
  • 5Like
  • 2
Reactions:
1718988775394.png

Can we please talk about these colours? Why are Greek, Turkish and Bulgarian all different shades of Grey, It just makes them hard to distinguish for no reason. Also, why are these cultures grey in the first place? Turkish should probably be some shade of red, Greek should either be purple or light blue and Bulgarian should be forest green. There are also way more odd colour choices, such as Kurdish being browny-green instead of Yellow, or Laz being almost identical to Pontic. Please change the colours soon, I don't want to play in a grey Anatolia!
 
  • 20Like
  • 6
  • 1Haha
  • 1
Reactions:
Is it possible, given the relative size of the locations, that the area of Galata within Constantinople, which was a colony of Genoa at game start, be included due to its strategic importance as a trade colony? Pic related is the Galata Citadel built by the Genoese, which for a long time was the tallest structure in the city. It wasn't built until 1348, about a decade after the game start, but a mission or event could be given to build a fort/castle in the location.
Galata Tower and the Church of San Paolo.jpg
 
  • 6Like
  • 3
  • 1
Reactions:
They did, in the sense that they considered themselves Caesars of Romans (Greek Orthodox population) within borders of Ottoman state. In the same way they also called themselves rulers of Arabia and Acem (Iran) and Sultan of Sultans and Khans of Khans. It was never about being specifically successors to Roman Empire as an entity but being sovereign of various peoples and lands. Similarly it wouldn't be too sensible to let Ottomans also form Arabia or Iran either despite their claim of rulership over those territories.

Basically specifically ascribing Roman succession to them narrows it down way too much to a particular descent to exclusion of everything else. They could be considered a successor to Roman Empire as they did succeed Roman state in Constantinople and inherited the important Patriarchate of Constantinople, as well as adapting some of their administrative methods but I don't think they can be considered the successor state to Romans to point of being able to somewhat revive Roman Empire when so much of their state traditions and institutions were based on Turco-Persianate, Turco-Mongol and Islamic precedent.
They did not call themselves Caesars of Romans but explicitly Caesars of Rome (Kayser-i Rûm) even having Greek documents refer to them as Basileus until the 18th century (which is also when they stopped claiming the Roman mantle). They also inherited/emulated more Byzantine traditions and institutions than people here seem to give credit for, not to mention Byzantine influence on Arab and Persian institutions in the first place. Rome also very famously went through a change in dominant religion and culture already. I don't think outright claiming the Ottomans are a successor state to Rome holds much ground, but I don't see a reason not to make the Restore the Roman Empire decision (Which every Christian and Pagan nation gets in EU4) available to them should they conquer that far - at least they had more of a claim to the title than Norway or Kongo did. Paradox games already let you realize much wilder historical claims than this one, and if Victoria could call herself Empress of India IRL then a Bayezid II controlling Italy and Gaul and Iberia could surely be called Autokrator.
 
  • 8Like
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
As usual, please consider that dynamic location naming is not yet a thing in this region, and therefore the inconsistencies in the language used.

Thank God, I was afraid that we'll be stuck with virgin English CoNsTaNtInOpLe when there's chad CONSTANTINOPOLIS/Kōnstantinoúpolis available.
 
  • 4Haha
Reactions:
You may want to rename Greek ethnicity to Romaioi as the term Greek was considered a grievous insult by those people. On the other hand, they literally used Greek as their native language. Would be interesting to see the culture shift back to the label Greek in the event of the collapse of the politea.
Agree with this. Romaioi and Greek were two different terms to identify different people and they seemed to based around the viewers religion in the 13th to 15th centuries. For example, a Catholic Greek would be more likely to identify as "Elliniki" versus "Romaioi". For the Italians occupying the Islands they consistantly refered to the people as "Graecus", which indeed was enormusly insulting to the people who still considered themselves Romaioi.

@Pavía Is there somewhere in the culture system to protray this divergence in cultural identity? I think there is a case to be made for a Romaioi culture to "exist" in 1337 to protray the Greek pops that still identify themselves as Roman, and then if they land under Catholic rule and that rule is maintained long enough or around the 1750s the "Greek" pops can show up to simulate the ethno-genesis of Modern Greek and the Modern Greek state. If primary tags for cultures is a thing, it could as help the BYZ/ERE tag by having it be the primary culture of Romaioi, making it retain cores; but once "Greek" shows the cores of the ERE vanish.
DId the catholics call them romans though? I doubt the Holy roman emperor referred to them as romans beside during diplomacy maybe
Nope. Never. At the Council of Florence in 1434 and Manuel II's diplomatic tour the leader of the ERE was identified as "Rex Graecorum" or "Imperator Graecorum". Likewise, later Greek Renaissance writers would somtimes have an odd time on the title of their current/former leaders using "Basileus Ellados (King/Emperor of the Greeks) with only anti-Union Greek Renaissance writers insisting on "Basileus Rhomanioi".
 
  • 5Like
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
It would be Cool if in case the other Turkish Beyliks win the war for Anatolia they adopt the Empire title and get the “Ottoman” missions and mechanics. Like if Candar won the Anatolian wars then they would become the Candari Empire and get all the missions and events that would ever been given to the Ottomans
 
  • 8Like
  • 2Love
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
I would like to see one unified Turkish culture map. This maps doesn't show them together so it just doesn't give clear picture. Also there should be Kara Tatars , Anatolian Mongols that remained there , in some parts , to this day. I would say Rize shouldn't be big as it is. Beside that Laz being their own people is a good addition . I hope there is a Georgian minority in Rize as there are Georgian villages in the area . I am from Trabzon myself (and I have a hate everything and anything that is about inferior people of Rize) but I must say map is accurate as far as I know . Also Maçka or Zigana (both can be used as name) should be the name of the passes to inner Anatolia , not Gümüşhane. That pass is known as Zigana Geçidi and is in borders of Trabzon , Maçka. Maçka is an old place and even existed in map of Imperator Rome as some people will remember (not a good source but your sources say it existed) . Also I don't have that many sources for these so if this gets ignored you are completely right to do so.
 
  • 2Like
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
I don't know if this is the place but can you give us some information about the migration patterns into and from anatolia? I think this is an important point because as far as I know, one of the important advantages the Ottomans had over the other beyliks were that they were a frontier beylik. This enabled them to gather religiously and sometimes tribally motivated extra pops (Ghazi warriors) throughout anatolia for their armies. This was especially important for the 14th century as the Mongol invasions and the soon to come Timur would plunge significant populations in iran and mesopotamia to migration into anatolia. Even the tribe that founded the Ottomans were such a tribe fleeing the Mongol invasions and was relocated to the frontier by the then still alive Seljuk sultanate. To the best of my knowledge this influx of population was one of the main means and also one of the main motivations of westward expansion of the Ottomans. It also partly accounts for the quick expansion of Ottoman power and Turkish population into Rumelia.

I don't know if you would/could implement such an emergent and complex migration dynamic over a large distance but such a system would make the rise of the Ottomans against both their beylik rivals and the Byzantines more realistic and simulative rather than tied to certain gamey Otto-specific bonuses or events.
The ghaza thesis has been descridited
 
  • 3Like
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions: