History of Lebanon - an appeal to fix the characters

[DaVincix]

The OP, I think, pretty much bang on as regards the history of the region.

It would be appropriate, I think, to move the Levantines to the Byzantine culture group and have a "melting pot" even where Arabs ruling Levantine Provinces can become "Levantine Arab".

I'm not sure you can justify splitting the cultures up, though, we only have one "Norse" culture and one "Anglo Saxon" culture. I could reasonably say that the Anglo-Saxons should be split into Angles and Saxons and Jutes in the CM and Old-Gods start and "Anglo-Saxon" should only appear once there's a King ruling both Angles and Saxons, so I think in the terms of the game one "Levantine" culture is appropriate but it should be grounded with the Greeks, not the Arabs.

Not really, that i can agree with this approach of argumentation.

The level of differentiation lays on the cultural backgrounds. Angles and Saxons in this regard are of the same background, entirely, as we speak of the northern germanic culture near the coast of the North Sea, with regards to the north-germanic tribes which migrated to the british isle. Same goes here with Jutes and Frisians, i would say, even their languages at the time weren't very different, their religion and lifestyle in whole marginally different.

In conclusion, only the dynastical view and historical immersion would be enhanced with such differentiations - but, i'm for that idea, as for the latter items. But, merely a low priority.

The Levante item of the OP lays otherwise to that kind of differentiation of Angles, Saxons, etc.

Along this sample - would be my suggestion, should be seen all differentiations of culture-names, properties and game-mechanics.

The list is long for CK2 in this regard.

Shall i start with "German" in all of HRE regions in CK2?
A time, where very rarely the term "German" (or only relates to this term) was existent in historical sources?
And all these collected people as "German" had in reality (until today) pretty different cultures, where, example, a north-german culture is much more familiar natively with a danish or west-frisian (aka netherlandish) than to a bavarian or swabian etc.?

Edit:

Remember, "german" is not even to "germanic".
Possibly only the modern german language makes the difference obvious. Here "german" is "deutsch", "Germany" is "Deutschland".
The old latin term used by Rome for the areas right of the river Rhine were called "Germania", thus its people were called "germanic", if they have been thrown together in descriptions rather than to use its several wholly diffferent tribes or tribe-names.
This has or had nothing to do with the term "german" which we have to day in usage.
Term "Deutsch" comes from terms like italian Tedesco, or merely the old-german term "diutisc", indo-germanic "teuta" (celtic: thiuda), which meant: belonging to the folk.

What does that all mean?

A term like "German" in CK2 is just wrong used, at least for the understanding of a german with historical knowledge. Better would be, if that kind of term change shall be used, just "germanic" (or east-frankish for medieval times, but i believe we have that already set as differentiation in CK2).

Iirc., the term "German" aka "deutsch" or "Deutschland" appeared seriously first in the 18th/19th century, the time of the nation-erections in middle-europe aka german lands.

Edit: Well, former statement relates to the nation-building time. Term "deutsch" as a term used by the inhabitants of medieval german lands probably appeared firstly in the middle of the 11th century.

 

[rocknok2]

The problem with pushing the start back is primarily that it's a massive amount of work fill in the entire map with rulers for that time. Especially in areas from which we don't have written records(such as scandinavia, and I guess also most of eastern Europe and the steppes?).
On top of that, the current mechanics of feudalism are already a stretch for the charlemagne(and old gods?) start. PUching bakc even further would have the game working on a system that utterly fails to represent the reality of those times(I'm getting this form other forumites though, don't hold me up to this). But it's primarily the amount of work that filling in the enitre map is that makes it a bit prohibitive to do so.

You do have a point. I suppose it could just be an expansion like 'The Sons of Abraham' - What strikes me, however, is the fact that ports in Phoenicia aren't developed at all. At the time - we were among the best ship-makers and provided the fleet for the Sassanids & Arabs - which launched from our ports. Notibly Tripolis and Tyre.

I'm currently borrowed by HOI4 to help out on the AI but I've pasted the suggestions to the rest of the team.
Though it is probably really low on the priority list but if you are lucky maybe a Beta finds it interesting and puts some effort on it.

Awesome! Thank you very much.

 

[DaVincix]

You do have a point. I suppose it could just be an expansion like 'The Sons of Abraham' - What strikes me, however, is the fact that ports in Phoenicia aren't developed at all. At the time - we were among the best ship-makers and provided the fleet for the Sassanids & Arabs - which launched from our ports. Notibly Tripolis and Tyre.



Awesome! Thank you very much.

That's right with the ports also in regard of trade. The areal ports were responsible for the wealth of the Levante regions especially also from on 1099, crusader states. The italian merchant/republican city states headed to that coastline.

Going far back into history, the people of that area were the ancestors of the Carthagenean Empire/Carthago, a or the naval and seatrading power of the mediterranean world of these ancient times (until Rome "popped up" and destroyed them), besides the Greek city states.

 

[rocknok2]

That's right with the ports also in regard of trade. The areal ports were responsible for the wealth of the Levante regions especially also from on 1099, crusader states. The italian merchant/republican city states headed to that coastline.

Going far back into history, the people of that area were the ancestors of the Carthagenean Empire/Carthago, a or the naval and seatrading power of the mediterranean world of these ancient times (until Rome "popped up" and destroyed them), besides the Greek city states.

Yes, exactly! When the crusaders came along, there were 40,000 of them in Tripoli - most of whom were italian merchants. I'm not exactly sure on the other cities, but the cities became dominated by 'franks'. What's interesting to note, however - is that when the muslims retook the area - they murdered and routed almost all the franks. But they sure did leave a genetic imprint - my maternal grandmother traces her heritage back to the crusaders in tripoli.

Oh, and of course the legendary siege of Tyre against Alexander. We even had a great library - but that was destroyed a bit before the muslim conquest. (Earthquake took it).

 

[DaVincix]

Yes, exactly! When the crusaders came along, there were 40,000 of them in Tripoli - most of whom were italian merchants. I'm not exactly sure on the other cities, but the cities became dominated by 'franks'. What's interesting to note, however - is that when the muslims retook the area - they murdered and routed almost all the franks. But they sure did leave a genetic imprint - my maternal grandmother traces her heritage back to the crusaders in tripoli.

Oh, and of course the legendary siege of Tyre against Alexander. We even had a great library - but that was destroyed a bit before the muslim conquest. (Earthquake took it).

As for "Franks" (originally lat./roman term: Franc/franci = the free man/men), it was the term used for all middle/west european continental people from on post-Charlemagne's empire-building, applied by just all people not habitating there.

The ones with knowlegde about the germanic migration period from on 200 AD know, that the "Franks" were (originally or rather probably) a conglomeration of east-germanic tribes, confederated, migrated a little westwards, settled in middle and north river Rhine areas (of todays Germany and Belgium), then finally spread westwards into modern French areas as (West-)Rome finally broke together, where they built their first empire under the merowingian Clodwig I, and so on then with Charlemagne's conquest period (of course, modern term "France" derives from this time), building of the HRE etc. - the period which gave all west/middle continental european border-buildings its stamp (if one want so, until today).

 

[Karlingid]

As for "Franks" (originally lat./roman term: Franc/franci = the free man/men), it was the term used for all middle/west european continental people from on post-Charlemagne's empire-building, applied by just all people not habitating there.

The ones with knowlegde about the germanic migration period from on 200 AD know, that the "Franks" were (originally or rather probably) a conglomeration of east-germanic tribes, confederated, migrated a little westwards, settled in middle and north river Rhine areas (of todays Germany and Belgium), then finally spread westwards into modern French areas as (West-)Rome finally broke together, where they built their first empire under the merowingian Clodwig I, and so on then with Charlemagne's conquest period (of course, modern term "France" derives from this time), building of the HRE etc. - the period which gave all west/middle continental european border-buildings its stamp (if one want so, until today).

East German or East Germanic? That's a fine difference between geography and linguistics. The former implies they came from the more easterly stretches of the Germanic peoples, whereas the latter implies close relation to Goths, Vandals, and Burgundians, whereas modern Franconian languages are not.

 

[rocknok2]

Well, given that half my family brandishes blonde hair, blue eyes, and are pale as the Norwegians, I'd think they definitely had some sort of Germanic influence. And they are Sunni Muslims, which would mean that their ancestors must have converted or faced slaughter by the muslims when the recaptured Lebanon. - Although tens of thousands were massacred anyhow, I'm not sure about the details.

 

[Scotty the Scot]

You are better of pleading to HIP and CK2+.
Paradox simply doesnt care about this at all.
Where is the profit???

Actually, CK2+ already has Assyrians.

 

[Damarrocarion]

But it's primarily the amount of work that filling in the enitre map is that makes it a bit prohibitive to do so.

PI can always leech off from my 935 MOD for new bookmark

 

[rocknok2]

Mods are cool and all, but I strongly believe is so elementary, and essential - that it should be patched.

 

[Blind Cavefish]

I think this is a symptom of a larger problem of a larger problem of "lumped" cultures, the problematic nature of which becomes most apparent in areas like the Levant