• 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:
Thank you for engaging with my argument and reading the sources man. I think the book is very much awesome. Ludi said on his video that I bend what the book means for my agenda, but I think you would agree that I do not, as someone who read both the book and my posts.

This is good criticism I think, it can't be inferred from Vryonis that these areas were Turkified rather than burnt to the ground. I think Routledge book saying the bishop of Ephesus complained about a lack of Christians might be more relevant here.

I think overreliance on Vryonis is a bit suspect. It's an important and thorough book but it both comes from an era before there was access to more Ottoman sources and also argues a specific narrative. He argues on death and destruction too much without reliable data and seems to infer worst case scenario whenever he speculates. For example the idea of Greeks all being forced to convert or put to death on West Coast doesn't line up with commentary from both Ibn Battuta and Gregory Palamas who spoke of existence of mixed Turkish and Greek communities in these areas. Sure Turks did engage in raiding and looting (including taking slaves) and there must have been cases of forceful conversion but it can't be too common and similarly entire villages being killed by Turkish raiders must have happened but it is hard to imagine that was the standard conduct and it couldn't be that there was such a total destruction and replacement on West coast by 1337. Situation is a bit different with hinterlands and especially mountain valleys where Yörük/Turcoman migrants made into their pastures but that concerns certain specific areas around mountains in West, Southwest and South. We also have to take into account impact of Black Death which might have affected coastal cities inhabited by Greeks and Latins that were on route of Blacksea and Aegean trade routes for eventual near total replacement of Greeks in Western coast.

However Ludi is wrong about West coast because Greeks moved to Symrna and specifically to the city from 18th century onward as economic conditions of Aeagean changed, it wasn't just gradual trend where there must have been more Greeks there in say 15th century than in 16th century. Moreover I think particularly the Southern provinces of Aydin and Muğla should be Turkish majority and should have a lot more of those tribal Turcoman populations.
 
  • 6
  • 2
  • 1Like
  • 1
Reactions:
I hope there will be different aspects of each beylik. So If Karesi's won Turkish Thunderdome them become more naval focused Turkish Empire or a Turkic Beylik with more Turkoman connections becomes winner they emerge as an Horde Turkish Empire. Each beylik had different features during that time so if you could apply that to the game it would be flavorfull
 
  • 2Like
  • 1
Reactions:
I don't think they should get all the possibilities though. Ottomans had several distinct features of governance and administration that separated them from other Turkish beyliks and indeed other Turkic / Turco-Mongol states at the time. Particularly in regards to their pragmatic and dynamic governance and ability to quickly absorb and adapt elites and institutions. Giving other beyliks just same stuff as Ottomans if they happen to replace them really doesn't do justice to their features as they were definitely unique and not just the Turkish beylik that happened to win the Turkish thunderdome.

Truly, though if they are completely deliminated, it would be better if instead of Eu4's reasoning of running all into rum, each Beylik Dynasty had a cause to unify under the scope of the Ottomans house naming system so it looked seamless. Might be good for some game-rules (Beyliks: railroad to ottoman, own states, only form rum)
 
Last edited:
  • 2Like
Reactions:
When will we see cultures and culture groups indept? I really hope that we won't have an abomination like "Caucasian Culture Group" like in EU4, where Georgians and Armenians are lumped together with Dagestanis and Circassians.
 
  • 1
  • 1Like
Reactions:
We have the Theodosian Walls.
Can there also be a modifier which makes Constantinople be worth so much war score so that it's impossible to take in a peace deal. But then have scripted content so that once the Byzantines are reduced to a rump state the modifier is removed. This way the Ottomans have to conquer much of the Balkans before they take Constantinople, as happened in our timeline. This would also fix the issue of the Ottomans just taking Constantinople shortly after game start.
 
There are some geographical issues.

There should be more farmlands, especially in the south near Çukurova. Also in the western coast and in the middle. Sparse vegatation is too big in the middle. That area is actually called the breadbasket of turkey.

Subtropical climate should include more provinces to the east, at least including Rize.

There should be coal in Karabük (north).

Too much forest in the west. This area should contain more woods/grasslands and less forest.
Is it called the “Breadbasket of Turkey” now or was it called that then? Agricultural revolutions have improved a lot of farmland across the world, so just saying the land is fertile in modern times is insufficient evidence for it being fertile in 1337
 
  • 3Like
Reactions:
Is it called the “Breadbasket of Turkey” now or was it called that then? Agricultural revolutions have improved a lot of farmland across the world, so just saying the land is fertile in modern times is insufficient evidence for it being fertile in 1337
Hm? How was the fertility of the soil itself changed?
You can improve irrigation and fertilization, but the land is still the same.
 
  • 3Like
Reactions:
I think that I've mentioned in another post, I think that the countries that I've playtested the most are Genoa and Hungary, which are quite different. But recently we've put some work into Anatolia, and given the feedback tweaks that we'll implement in a few weeks, I think that I'll test the Ottomans more thoroughly.
very happy to read this. I get Genoa (the golden child for the bank mechanic) and i also get the Ottomans for well obvious reasons, but now i wonder about Hungary, it seems very clear to me that Hungary will have some very unique mechanic linked to them, anyone has any idea about what that could be? or maybe you Pavia wanna enlighten us :)
 
  • 2Like
Reactions:
Is it called the “Breadbasket of Turkey” now or was it called that then? Agricultural revolutions have improved a lot of farmland across the world, so just saying the land is fertile in modern times is insufficient evidence for it being fertile in 1337

The vegetation in the area is indeed sparse in Central Anatolia, however region of Konya was and still is producer of large amount of grains and cereals but those grow in sparse vegetation areas anyway.
 
I'll let people more researched debate on the specifics of cultural and religious distributions, but I'd personally suggest that the colors of the cultures be more easily distinguished. I have some suggestions below which try and match to colors generally associated with the culture in question where possible, or atleast try and remain easily distinguishable. The sea seems to be darker in the game than it is on this basemap so I'm not too worried about the Greek color being too close to the sea despite how it comes across in the map below.

color suggestions.png
 
  • 10
  • 3Like
Reactions:
Hm? How was the fertility of the soil itself changed?
You can improve irrigation and fertilization, but the land is still the same.
You can change fertility of soil with better drainage and other soil management techniques. I don’t know much about Anatolian agriculture, which is why I asked the question.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
We want to give other Turkish Beyliks similar possibilities to those of the Ottomans if they become the 'regional winner', indeed.
regarding this please make the missions (or whatever equivalent in eu5) be slightly different based on who forms said nation. the same should hopefully happen for other major countries. germany, italy, spain, gb, russia come to mind.

i really felt it was a huge miss in eu4 for formable countries to not have partially different missions based on who form it
 
Last edited:
  • 3Like
Reactions:
Some additional sources to support the claims made by some users. I apologize for not quoting directly; I'm not very familiar with the multi-quote system.

@Justice Commander and the Varsak(s)

One of the earliest and most reliable sources is Qalqashandī's Ṣubḥ al-A‘shā (c.a. 1412) who locates them near Tarsus (السابعة- الورسق: تركمان طرسوس: "N7 - the Varsak: the Turkomans of Tarsus" VII: 282). It is difficult to pinpoint exactly when they arrived in the region. Ottoman sources suggest the 1230s but these are not very reliable for earlier periods. In any case, there should be large(r) communities of Turkmens around the (infranchisable) Bulgar (Bolkar) range.

Regarding the Akhi Republic, this is what ACS Peacock, one of the foremost experts on the subject has to say in Islam, Literature and Society in Mongol Anatolia (p. 118):
"Futuwwa constituted a dominant force in Anatolian urban life from the late thirteenth century, with akhīs on occasion acting as the effective rulers of cities: as Ibn Battuta puts it, ‘It is one of the customs of this land that in places that do not have a sultan, the akhī is the ruler.’ Turkish scholars have even described Ankara as an ‘akhī republic’. That is a contention based on little evidence, but contemporary sources do describe the wealth and power of some akhīs in terms redolent of kingship. The Diwan of Sultan Walad contains numerous poems dedicated to the akhīs who are depicted as virtually monarchs in their own right."

@Froonk and Vryonis

Vryonis was a pioneer but his work has been superseded by Beihammer, Byzantium and the Emergence of Muslim-Turkish Anatolia, ca. 1040-1130 for the early Seljuk period and Korobeinikov, Byzantium and the Turks in the Thirteenth Century for the 13th and early 14th centuries. Peacock's Islam, Literature and Society in Mongol Anatolia is also very useful to understand the cultural history of the 13th and 14th centuries. There is also a recent collection with some useful articles on the relationship between "Franks", Romans/Greeks/Byzantines and Turks in Beihammer, Crusading, Society, and Politics in the Eastern Mediterranean in the Age of King Peter I of Cyprus. Those who can read Turkish will find useful surveys (Köprülü, Turan, Uzunçarşılı, etc) but these areoften very old and obviously not up to date with recent advances. Beyond this you enter uncharted territory. This is an extremely poorly studied field with limited sources.
 
  • 3Like
  • 3
Reactions:
You can change fertility of soil with better drainage and other soil management techniques. I don’t know much about Anatolian agriculture, which is why I asked the question.
Hm, afaik, soil management is done to prevent loss of fertility, rather than improving it above its natural capabilities.
All I've seen about central Anatolian soil is that it has little or no constraints for agriculture and does well in all categories of soil quality.
For example, this is a map of soil workability (low inputs):
workability.png


Of course there is an argument to be made how, for example, soil workability relates to Medieval and Early Modern technology. For example, the wet soils of the Po valley weren't workable for the Romans because they didn't have suitable ploughs and horseshoes, but once those technological constraints were overcome, they became the most fertile region in Italy. I'm not sure if any significant constraints like that actually existed in the time period, though.
 
Last edited:
is there a name in greek for the Çatalca peninsula
the province in the map is called Byzantion which is a pretty archaic name for it
I can't seem to find what the peninsula would be called otherwise though
Kaspar Osraige you have any clue? you seem to have answers to a lot of things thankfully lol
I think Byzantion is fine really. It has a rustic feel to it.
Is it called the “Breadbasket of Turkey” now or was it called that then? Agricultural revolutions have improved a lot of farmland across the world, so just saying the land is fertile in modern times is insufficient evidence for it being fertile in 1337
Hm? How was the fertility of the soil itself changed?
You can improve irrigation and fertilization, but the land is still the same.
It is not exceptionally fertile chernozem or anything, I don't think it should have farmlands. They just produce a lot of wheat.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
It is not exceptionally fertile chernozem or anything, I don't think it should have farmlands. They just produce a lot of wheat.
Agreed, there should be agricultural resources (i.e. wheat) and probably a mix of grassland and sparse vegetation, but farmland would only be appropriate along rivers that provide irrigation.
 
  • 2
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Agreed, there should be agricultural resources (i.e. wheat) and probably a mix of grassland and sparse vegetation, but farmland would only be appropriate along rivers that provide irrigation.
But the lack of farmlands along Meander, in Kızılırmak and Yeşilırmak basins and in Çukurova is kind of off in my opinion. Especially Çukurova. It's like the only decent farmland in Anatolia lol.
 
  • 2Like
  • 2Haha
Reactions: