Correct names for Arabs

[Mad King James]

While most cultures in the game period helpfully adhere to the Name Surname system that CK bases itself on, Arabs do not.

The proper "first name" form of Arabs is, for men:
%name% ibn %fathername%

for women:
%name% bint %fathername%

Then for surnames, if the surname is of the founder of the dynasty:
banu %founder%

or

al-%founder%i

for instance banu Qureish (of the tribe of Qureish) or al-Qureishi (the Qureishi).

 

[Hawkeye1489]

Of course if you include this feature, you also have to include the same thing for the Nordic countries aswell

 

[Boblof]

Of course if you include this feature, you also have to include the same thing for the Nordic countries aswell

Quite a few others as well I would think, Patronyms wern't exactly unusual.

 

[Hawkeye1489]

Oh I know, I was just pointing out an obvious example . While it would be optimal and most historic, I just wouldn't want to tax the engine with what can be taken by some to be superfluous for lack of a better term.

 

[Veldmaarschalk]

Well you might get strange results if characters have a different culture then their father, assuming that this feature is still in CK2.

Then you will get things like this , 'Abdullah ibn Heinrich' or 'Heinrich ibn Abdullah'

 

[Earl Uhtred]

I can think of a bunch of other cultures that might benefit from a more flexible system - Irish, Welsh, Anglo-Saxon to name but three.

 

[Mad King James]

Well you might get strange results if characters have a different culture then their father, assuming that this feature is still in CK2.

Then you will get things like this , 'Abdullah ibn Heinrich' or 'Heinrich ibn Abdullah'

Actually that's not as unusual as you might think.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banu_Qasi

Most famous example in Europe, a Basque Muslim dynasty.

 

[Mad King James]

It's true lots of other dynasties have their patronymics etc incorrectly.

For instance Llywelyn the Great of Wales should really be:

Llywelyn (his name) ab Iorwerth (his patronymic) Aberffraw (dynasty name)

 

[Gwyn ap Nud]

Also, if there was culture change, necessary for his name to be Heinrich, you can code it so he's no longer 'ibn'. Instead, you can make it so that becomes, I dunno, "von whateverplaceburg", depending on where he owned, like people were actually known.

 

[RedRooster81]

Also, if there was culture change, necessary for his name to be Heinrich, you can code it so he's no longer 'ibn'. Instead, you can make it so that becomes, I dunno, "von whateverplaceburg", depending on where he owned, like people were actually known.

There could be a more general familial description, such as "Robert of Inverness son of John of Fife" that would work for many cultures. It would lack linguistic details but sound sort of official, given that documents from the period would have been written in official languages, e.g., Latin, Greek, Turkish, or Arabic, not likely High German or English or Aragonese, etc.

 

[Peter Ebbesen]

Well you might get strange results if characters have a different culture then their father, assuming that this feature is still in CK2.

Then you will get things like this , 'Abdullah ibn Heinrich' or 'Heinrich ibn Abdullah'

That wouldn't qualify as "strange results" to me - it would qualify as awesome!


....especially if coupled with events that will occasionally fire for an entire dynasty changing its name if the head of the dynasty adheres to a different naming convention than the one that governed its forebears: "I am throwing off the shackles of outmoded linguistical conventions and bringing us kicking and screaming into the 12th century! From now on, my family, I'll be known as Heinrich Hotpants and you'll all be Hotpants together with me or I'll disinherit you."

 

[Orinsul]

Arabs should have formalised names just like everyone else does.

most cultures had last names that changed depending on who their father is or what he does or what their work is or what title they hold.

But Dynasty names are something that largely only exist when historians come to write about it. So it works not being accurate.

 

[Cèsar de Quart]

In Western Europe, there were several antroponymical fashions:

The "Central" fashion: Aymar de Sémur, Heinrich von Hohenstaufen, etc. There is a family coming from a certain castle or town, and the name gets stucked. It was common in France, Germany, Italy and Spain alike. Even though they took more important titles and duchies, their original name stood as the name of the family. The House of Lusignan became powerful, but it was still known as the House of Lusignan. The same for the Hohenstaufens, the Castillian House of Lara, the House of Châtillon... there are exceptions, of course.

The Spanish fashion was naming someone by his given name, then his father's name, then his family procedence. Thus we have "Pedro Fernández de Lara", whose father was Fernando López de Lara". Castillian tradition used the -ez as an evolution of Latin genitive -is, which sometimes indicates possession. The Catalan tradition was similar, but kept the names unaltered. "Ramon Borrell de Barcelona" was the son of Count Borrell, and his son was Berenguer Ramon, that is, "Berenguer son of Ramon". The tradition became weird when this Berenguer Ramon named his twin sons "Ramon Berenguer" and "Berenguer Ramon".

The Scandinavians didn't use to add any reference to the family, it was just the patronymic. Magnus Sverkersson, Halvdan Haraldsson, etc.
The Normans had a "latinized" version of that through the "Fitz-" patricle, meaning "son of". Thus, Robert of Chester, son of Eustace, was known as Robert FitzEustace. Henry II was known sometimes as Henry FitzEmpress (since his mother was Empress Maud).

 

[Earl Uhtred]

Henry II was known sometimes as Henry FitzEmpress (since his mother was Empress Maud).

And Henry fitz her? That's just sick.