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.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly. You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
I couldn't readily find another source, but I read on Wiki that the kingdom of Mrauk-U(Arakan) was a vassal of Bengal from around 1429 to 1531. The rulers of Arakan recieved their titles from Bengal. They were Buddhist but had Bengali coins and titles of Emir. I can't see why they wouldn't be a vassal of Bengal, as it wouldn't throw power off in the region as Orissa constantly conquers the Bengal region anyways.
It was a fair while since I looked into this but I know I ended up with the current solution. Feel free to provide sources for Arakan actually being subservient to Bengal though and it might be revisited
IIRC the Ganeshas helped the Mrauk-U back to power but if I recall correctly their ties to them were never that strong (and either way by the start of our game the short reign of the Ganeshas in Bengal is already over).
The Arakanese/Mrauk-U/Magh are generally referred to in pretty harsh ways by Bengal and later Mughal chroniclers as they encroached on both lands and Bengali trade a lot. They also took in Bengali outcasts and sheltered all kinds of pirates who had similar interests in raiding the ships headed for Chittagong or the Ganges Delta. That doesn't mean they couldn't have been vassals in 1444 in itself though.
Still it's a far cry from the states of Garjat, who were almost religiously devoted (if at times a bit unruly) to whoever held the Orissa coastline.
From chapter 2 of the book "Arakan and Bengal : the rise and decline of the Mrauk U kingdom (Burma) from the fifteenth to the seventeeth century AD"
"The exact circumstances surrounding Man Co Mwan’s invasion are vague, but
all different chronicle traditions reserve an important role for assistance provided by the
Bengal sultan Jalal ud-Din (1415/6-1432/3).4
According to the Arakanese chronicles, Mrauk
U would remain tributary to the Bengal sultans for several decades afterwards."
Yeah that's the Ganeshas, at the start of the game they've been violently deposed
In any event being a tributary for "decades" after a war is more akin to paying war reparations in EU terms. In the same period they conquered much of the Chittagong province from Bengal after all.
I would guess it's more like a relationahip muscovy would have with the hordes. Wiki does tend to ocerstate things. It'd be nice to have some sort of representation though since Arakan apparently still relied on Bengalese military assistance from the Ava. I guess it's all interpretation
On Orissa and Bengal:
Our start date presents an interesting challenge with Orissa. In 1444 they were clearly very strong. Kapilendra managed to beat and expand despite warring with Jaunpur, Bengal, the Bahmanis, the Velamas and Reddys and even Vijayanagar. At the same time his empire was fragile as the Orissa homeland really cannot support an empire of the kind it looked like he might build. Still it's a great what-if and I kind of like seeing that Orissa sometimes thrives in India
In general the 15th century is a great time to start for an early modern game when it comes to India. The collapse of Delhi has left the place with a large number of potential powers and ambitious new dynasties (quite different from at least the two earliest the start dates of CK2 for instance).
Could you at least look into making Ava accept Burman at the start? It's very nice to hear the reasonings behind these changes. It seemed very odd to me since Bengal usually gets conquered since Muslims during the time usually resisted foreign rule. Maybe Dhaka should start Muslim? (Although I know syncretism was popular)
.png){kind=avatar}
