The Sword of Islam - Dev Diary 2

[tapewormlondon]

Same day as Civilization V: Gods and Kings. D'oh. I'll probably play G&K and wait for 1.06g

I was contemplating buying G&K, despite the abortion that was CIV 5 I thought it should get one last chance.

It now doesnt have a hope in hell of being bought by me, thanks to this release and the latest sale for Pdox games!

[DominusNovus]

Ibn Khaldun reckoned the cycle as normally taking 4 generations to rise and fall.

Interesting that thats the same number as the Strauss-Howe generational theory.

[NewbieOne]

I agree completely. It's not a fair comparison, but should the Lord Mayor of London ride around in a beaten up rusty 1986 Yugo with a missing tail light? The point is, you expect people of a certain social standing to maintain a certain standard of living (or some sort). Having a large dynasty assures a rather easy transition in power once the beloved sultan finally goes on to his hereafter, so it is a bit of a political issue, too, plain and simple.

There's nothing immoral in maintaining a standard of living (or especially publicly owned trappings of office) according to one's station but piety and prestige don't always go hand-in-hand. I guess one could lump Muslim rulers with the dilemma: pick prestige or pick piety. There could be some such choices for Christian rulers too, I guess. There is an event in which you lose prestige if you refuse to fabricate claims, there are always some prestige penalties for choosing low-key morally decent options in parenting dialogues. Or that Pride, while a vice, increases prestige (in fact, it might as well have a piety reducing effect too).

[KonradRichtmark]

On the other hand, some Islamic rulers never married but went with concubines all the way, like the latter (VERY decadent) Umayyads. I'm not sure they lost any prestige over lack of wives.

[Akjosch]

Interesting that thats the same number as the Strauss-Howe generational theory.

They actually cite Ibn Khaldun.

[Tuplis]

Shut up and take my money.

[RedRooster81]

On the other hand, some Islamic rulers never married but went with concubines all the way, like the latter (VERY decadent) Umayyads. I'm not sure they lost any prestige over lack of wives.

The Ottomans picked up on that policy and kept to it for a long time. Sometime around Murad II IIRC. Suleiman the Magnificent broke with tradition by marrying his favorite concubine, but Selim the Sot picked it up again.

[Demiansky]

The Decadence concept appears to have its roots in one aspect of Ibn Khaldun’s view of historical dynastic cycles. These were driven by the relationship between nomadic and settled peoples – townsmen and tribesmen. Towns are where civilization, including culture, arts and sciences, flowers and grows. Towns have cultural and commercial values rather than martial ones, and are subject to the bad influences of corruption, luxury and extravagance (peasants in this analysis obviously don’t enjoy luxury – they are essentially an economic resource).

Nomadic tribesmen are destructive to civilization (physically as well as culturally – agriculture from the Middle East across North Africa was ravaged by nomadic grazing on cropfields after the conquest). Nomads are seen as unlettered rough characters, but with the virtues of their nomadic existence – independent self-reliance, thrift, hardiness, firm morality, cohesive “group feeling,” and martial spirit and skills.

Khaldun’s cycle commences with settled peoples conquered by nomads who establish a strong dynasty as a ruling class with cohesive “group feeling” and exhibiting tribal virtues. Over time, a life of luxury (or at least relative ease) withers tribal virtues and martial and religious energies. Administration falls into the hands of a bureaucracy of townsmen or foreigners and military security into the hands of non-tribesmen. The ruling dynasty can become detached from both their tribal roots and the actual governance of their realm, which is likely to affect its effectiveness. Ibn Khaldun understood how expenditure tended to escalate out of proportion to results with proliferation of positions and expenses, dynastic luxury, waste, and outright embezzlement. This prompts increases in taxes and other government levies on the productive classes. Ibn Khaldun noted how Increasingly severe exactions and unwise palliatives discourage production and lower overall revenues, leading toward crisis and financial collapse. Weakened regimes eventually succumb to new rulers who can start afresh. Ibn Khaldun reckoned the cycle as normally taking 4 generations to rise and fall.

This process drew from experience including the original conquests through the Mongol invasion and displacement of Muslim rulers in the east. However, cycles did not always match this template, and Ibn Khaldun acknowledged that the unifying influences of religion could have a great impact by enhancing or creating group feeling that could sustain a more stable dynastic state. Just as the Catholic church had an effect in shaping principles of legitimacy in Europe, Islamic law did so in Muslim countries. This is where the Islamic laws relating to government and how these shaped the process of obtaining and maintaining stabilizing legitimacy relate to the overall process. The thread on legitimacy has already been mentioned.

My fear is that SOI’s Decadence might address some elements of one aspect of the natural dynastic process seen as universal by Ibn Khaldun, but leave out the important religious elements and unique process of legitimacy formation under Islam. This was a key underpinning of strong and enduring dynastic regimes and crucial to the formation of recognized caliphates.

Yes, very well spoken. This is what I'm concerned about as well. I fear that Paradox may be using a few notable and well recognized examples of Islamic history to define a much broader, much more diverse range of cultures.

[Blastaz]

Yes, very well spoken. This is what I'm concerned about as well. I fear that Paradox may be using a few notable and well recognized examples of Islamic history to define a much broader, much more diverse range of cultures.

Hold the press:

"Game Simplifies History Shock!"

[Tamas]

Yes, very well spoken. This is what I'm concerned about as well. I fear that Paradox may be using a few notable and well recognized examples of Islamic history to define a much broader, much more diverse range of cultures.

They are already doing that to define the diverse range of Christian cultures, so why not with Islam?

[wolfing]

looks like it will be very challenging for me, as I has a house rule of not using assassination (I just consider it a cheesy mechanic), interesting times ahead!

[Joel M Bridge]

no decences system is moer basic on ruler get right rule from god, and act out will of god any one can take it.

[Benandorf]

This looks absolutely amazing. What's the phrase? Oh, right...

SHUT UP AND TAKE MY MONEY!

[Nominull]

They are already doing that to define the diverse range of Christian cultures, so why not with Islam?

Yeah, I think the Byzantium ERE fans might have a thing or two to say about overgeneralization across a broad range of cultures.

[bmullins0118]

Where can I find the live streams?! D:

[Mushro0m]

Where can I find the live streams?! D:

As said on Page 5 :

Check this one :
http://de.twitch.tv/paradoxinteractive/b/320689719

At 1h:20min the CK2 session starts. At 1h:47min the Q&A starts.

[Voy]

I can barely wait for the 1.6 patch! I'm also very interested in the minor changes like the possibility of "added missing characters" and minor tweaks to the existing dynasties. The new region in the duchy of Spoleto is also quite nice a feature if only a minor minor minor addition to Italy and the pope. Although a majority is for the Muslim world, which is great, I have my hopes up for some new gaming experience on the European continent.

[MartinSWE]

looks like it will be very challenging for me, as I has a house rule of not using assassination (I just consider it a cheesy mechanic), interesting times ahead!

From what I have understood your wives and other relatives will unleash a torrent of assassinations themselves to put themselves or their favourite heir in position to take over. You shouldn´t have to commit mass murder yourself.

[Sleight of Hand]

I've just finished watching the E3 stream, and Doomdark said 'why not?' to a question on expanding the map further eastward in a later patch. That'd be pretty good.

[Nuril]

I've just finished watching the E3 stream, and Doomdark said 'why not?' to a question on expanding the map further eastward in a later patch. That'd be pretty good.

Ugh.. That'd screw me over big-time, since then you'd have to rewrite every single Positions-entry and redesign maps to fit the new proportions. Sincerely hope they don't start doing that (for admittedly selfish reasons).