Some EU III flag corrections and other notes based on the "original" Catalan Atlas

[Tunch Khan]

It is a common fact that most of the ancient flags that we know of, (especially those belonging to more "exotic" countries) are passed to us through the illustrious Catalan Atlas (1375) and her notorious reproductions.

As they were quite popular and expensive, various artists have made their own reproductions well until the 19th Century. Copies of copies were made and eventually, with every new copy, there was an abundance of new imaginary flags to the taste of the copying artist.

The result is the unfortunate wrong perception of the accuracy of some of these flags, banners and symbols, not only here in EU III, but also in other sources, of course including Wikipedia herself.

The errors on these banners came to my attention after I visitied an exhibition at the UN Building (Encounter of Civilizations: Ibn Khaldun - open until February) and found a chance to closely examine the very original map charted by the acclaimed Jewish cartographer of the Mallorcan School: Abraham Cresques in 1375.

The colors on the flags were somewhat fading, but clearly visible and easy to identify.

The Timurid Flag:

One striking example to a misrepresentation in EUIII was the Timurid flag, which resembles "three red spheres on a black surface". In the original, the flag has "three red upward pointing circular crescents based on a black background". Ironically, Wikipedia which displays the same wrong image shows the Catalan Atlas as their source for the Timurid flag (and Mamluks as well). Apparently Wikipedia's sensitivity to copyrighted materials for common images does not apply here when it comes to double check a source with the Bibliothèque Nationale de France.




The Mamluk Flag:

From the below image, it is also clear that the Mamluk flag is not a mystical letter "C" (often perceived to be a bow), but a proper "white crescent facing the mast on golden background":



The lands of Asia Minor is registered under the name: TURCHIA

As most forumites are familiar, there's an ongoing discussion among a small group regarding names of the Anatolian provinces, which usually surface in mod discussions all the way into Victoria mods. Hopefully, this 1375 naming of Asia Minor as Turkey will bring some sense into those who are in denial of Turkish presence in that country since 1071.

The Karaman Flag:

Yes it's a blue Seal of Solomon as depicted correctly in most sources, next to a blue-grey striped section. The identical blue-grey stripes also appear right next to the Kingdom of Cyprus flag (a major contender to the Kingdom of Jerusalem back then) and next to the Knights of Rhodes flag flying over Philadelphia (fell to Turks in 1390 - modern Alasehir in Turkey). The grey color I see could as well be a faded argent and make sense in the Cypriot flag, as blue and argent (silver) stripes are the colors of the Lusignan family which ruled over Cyprus. Is it a coincidence that the Karamanids have the same colors, or does it indicate anything else? As there's no recorded mention of a Cypriot-Karamanid alliance or vassalage relationship in that period, I am going for the coincidence option. The Philadelphian Knights however, can possibly be vassals to the King of Cyprus. But their's is already history when EU III starts.

The Candar Flag:

It's a red Seal of Solomon over white background with six tiny red crescents surrounding the seal outside between the corners of the six pointed star, all of them facing outwards.



The Trebizond Flag:

It's a black double headed eagle on a crimson background.



The Byzantine Flag:

The standard Byzantine banner is loud and clear, flying over Constantinopolis and some city in West Black Sea coast of Turkey, possibly Heraclea. There is also an independent Genoese holding, right adjacent to Constantinople, the city of Galata flying Genoese colors like the Crimean colonies.

[Jodien]

Originally Posted by Tunch Khan

As most forumites are familiar, there's an ongoing discussion among a small group regarding names of the Anatolian provinces, which usually surface in mod discussions all the way into Victoria mods. Hopefully, this 1375 naming of Asia Minor as Turkey will bring some sense into those who are in denial of Turkish presence in that country since 1071.

I didn't understand what you suggest here. Making Asia Minor one big province renamed as Turkey or what?
I think Asia Minor is a historicaly accurate name for the area since Turkey is almost always perceived as the modern republic founded in 20th century.

[Tunch Khan]

Originally Posted by Jodien

I didn't understand what you suggest here. Making Asia Minor one big province renamed as Turkey or what?
I think Asia Minor is a historicaly accurate name for the area since Turkey is almost always perceived as the modern republic founded in 20th century.

Let's just stick to the flags if you don't mind. I placed that note just for the reference as I know it's difficult to change a thousand year old grudges. It turns out a Jewish cartographer of the Middle Ages from Aragon has less difficulty in accepting the presence of another civilization than a 21st Century person. Again, let's just stick to the flags issue please.

[Tunch Khan]

Some more suggestions, Ramazan and Shirvan based on Kaigon's flagsite:

[Duke of Earl]

Originally Posted by Tunch Khan

Let's just stick to the flags if you don't mind. I placed that note just for the reference as I know it's difficult to change a thousand year old grudges. It turns out a Jewish cartographer of the Middle Ages from Aragon has less difficulty in accepting the presence of another civilization than a 21st Century person. Again, let's just stick to the flags issue please.

Hey, you brought it up...

As for the flags, great finds and thanks for the link to the Bibliothèque Nationale website. Good stuff.

[Birger]

Good find.

Trebizond used a single headed eagle after the recapture of Contantinople, and the Komnenos eagle were black (sable) on a yellow (or) background.

[Sarmatia1871]

Originally Posted by Tunch Khan

I placed that note just for the reference as I know it's difficult to change a thousand year old grudges. It turns out a Jewish cartographer of the Middle Ages from Aragon has less difficulty in accepting the presence of another civilization than a 21st Century person. Again, let's just stick to the flags issue please.

"Asia Minor" is a perfectly acceptable geographic designation, in the same way that "Turkey" is a national/state-based designation for roughly the same area (similar to "Iberia" and "Spain and Portugal" - they're both referring to the same area, just using different terms of reference). Using one rather than the other by no means implies some sort of "historical grudge."

The fact that a 14th century cartographer would refer to a part of Asia Minor as "Turkey" isn't particularly relevant: if anything, the use of the term "Turkey" by medieval and early modern writers, when Turks were considered the antithesis of European Christian civilization, is more based on hostility and a sense of alien-ness than using a neutral geographic term like Asia Minor. And maps from the sixteenth to the mid-nineteenth century would routinely refer to the Balkans as "Turkey in Europe" - does that mean they should be renamed as well?

[Tunch Khan]

Originally Posted by Sarmatia1871

"Asia Minor" is a perfectly acceptable geographic designation, in the same way that "Turkey" is a national/state-based designation for roughly the same area (similar to "Iberia" and "Spain and Portugal" - they're both referring to the same area, just using different terms of reference). Using one rather than the other by no means implies some sort of "historical grudge."

The fact that a 14th century cartographer would refer to a part of Asia Minor as "Turkey" isn't particularly relevant: if anything, the use of the term "Turkey" by medieval and early modern writers, when Turks were considered the antithesis of European Christian civilization, is more based on hostility and a sense of alien-ness than using a neutral geographic term like Asia Minor. And maps from the sixteenth to the mid-nineteenth century would routinely refer to the Balkans as "Turkey in Europe" - does that mean they should be renamed as well?

Geographicly either Asia Minor or Anatolia (which comes from a Greek word) are fine descriptions and perfectly acceptable. However, in a political map, those names do not mean anything at all. Where all countries are referred with their names, it is only normal to refer to Asia Minor as Turkey / Turchia, which is populated by numerous Turkish Beydoms, the same way German Principalities are referred as Germania in the same map.

As to "Turkey in Europe", that is also a political reference as Ottoman Empire is already spread out to include all of the Balkan penninsula all the way until 1878.

My argument was only about the naming of Turkey, as I replied to the poster who claimed "Turkey" only became a political entity after 1920. I am only saying that the Republicans did not invent the term. I simply used the map to make this minor point.

[Tunch Khan]

Originally Posted by Birger

Good find.

Trebizond used a single headed eagle after the recapture of Contantinople, and the Komnenos eagle were black (sable) on a yellow (or) background.

That is precious info, do you have any samples by any chance?

[Birger]

Comnenos (emperors of Trebizonde): Argent, three bars Sable.

http://www.heraldica.org/topics/national/byzantin.htm

"The Emperors of Trebizond used as standard the double-headed eagle of Byzantium, however after 1261 they recognized the new Byzantine Empire proclaimed by the Emperors of Nicaea following the reconquest of Constantinople and the eagle of Trebizond lost a head".

http://romeartlover.tripod.com/Trebison.html

[Tunch Khan]

Originally Posted by Birger

Comnenos (emperors of Trebizonde): Argent, three bars Sable.

http://www.heraldica.org/topics/national/byzantin.htm

"The Emperors of Trebizond used as standard the double-headed eagle of Byzantium, however after 1261 they recognized the new Byzantine Empire proclaimed by the Emperors of Nicaea following the reconquest of Constantinople and the eagle of Trebizond lost a head".

http://romeartlover.tripod.com/Trebison.html

Interesting article. So be it, the Trebizoni eagle shall have a single head.