Imperator: Rome Developer Diary - 15th of June 2020

[Gurkhal]

I think that is questionable.
The use of the aramaic as a lingua franca and a prestige language in a large part of west Asia is well known but it's a language, not a full culture (this should be considered in the culture system, btw).

Aramaic - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The romans didn't encourage the spread of hellenic culture in the eastern Mediterranian, they tried to spread their own latin culture (with little success) and, after the split of the empire in two halves, the Eastern Roman Empire (aka Byzantine Empire) adopted hellenic as primary culture (Basileía Rhōmaíōn).

Byzantine Empire - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

I agree that Aramaic was a language and not a culture that was shared by all speakers of Aramaic. But I think this is pretty much the same with Greece and Latin and Roman culture. Just as you can speak Aramaic and that language does not per necessity mark you for a Aramaic culture, so you can reasonably speek Greek and still be Roman as opposed to a Hellene in culture.

Is it more complex than this? Yes, but since the game does include language as a separate part of a character or POPs identity so it must be rolled into the culture tag. As such culture represents an lingo-ethno-cultural identity, and even less so localized forms of culture such as Thraco-Roman, Gallo-Roman etc. cultures. And thus we must accept some simplifications in this regard.

 

[Samitte]

@Trin Tragula

So I decided to look into the events surrounding Ariarathes II and Cappadocia out of interest, since its generally a footnote in Armenian history. And it seems that the general opinion amongst scholars is split on the dating of these events, but generally in favour of them having happened later, around 260 BCE, which makes Amyntas a Seleukid governor/general of Cappadocia. From what I can access right now, most Hellenistic-period historians that discuss the events (M. Marchiak (2016, below), L. Ballestros Pastor (2006), M. J. Olbrycht (2013, below) J. D. Grainger (1997), H. Bengston (1964) seem to prefer the later date, with Diodorus Siculus being wrong/misinformed/vague.

In either case (even if Diodorus Siculus is followed), however, Ariarathres II seems to have become a satrap/'vassal' of the Seleukids shortly afterwards, not a tributary of the Armenians. The first attested king of Cappadocia is Ariarathes III, in 255 BCE. The events as described by Diodorus Siculus (Ariarathes returning post-Eumenes's death but while Seleukos and Antigonos are occupied elsewhere.),

M. Marchiak, 2016:

At the same time, the involvement of Orontes (III) in the struggle between the Seleucids and Ariarathes II in Kappadokia (Diod. 31.19.4– 6) in ca. 261 BCE...

(Marchiak, M., Sophene, Gordyene, and Adiabene: Three Regna Minora of Northern Mesopotamia Between East and West (2017, Leiden), p. 115.)

M. J. Olbrycht, 2013:

After Ipsus most of Asia Minor was given to Lysimachus, although we know nothing about his rule east of Amastris, and Appian ( Syr. 55) suggests that Cappadocia passes directly from Cassander to Seleucus. The latter sent there Amyntas as a stratēgos, but this governor was beaten by Ariarathes II, the son of Perdiccas’ rival, with the support of Ardoates, ruler of Armenia.

(Olbrycht, M. J., 'Iranians in the Diadochi Period', in Troncoso, V. A. and Anson, E. M., After Alexander: The Time of the Diadochi (323-281 BC) (Oxford, 2013), pp. 159-182, p. 185.)
A correct reading in the above for 'Ardoates' would be Orontes III.

With this in mind, can it still be changed? With Cappadocia (which might have included (parts of) Pontus at this time as well, but once again opinions vary wildly) going to the Diadochi who 'wins'? In any case, it should definitely not be an Armenian tributary.

 

[pengoyo]

I think that is questionable.
The use of the aramaic as a lingua franca and a prestige language in a large part of west Asia is well known but it's a language, not a full culture (this should be considered in the culture system, btw).

Aramaic - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

I agree that Aramaic spread as more of a language than the full culture, but I:R currently doesn't distinguish between the two.

So the spread of a lingua franca means that more of you subjects can understand a common language which makes them easier to govern. This is mechanically what the culture system does. So while it's not perfect, I think there is potential for representing a spreading lingua franca as a spreading culture in the abstract way I:R represents culture.

The romans didn't encourage the spread of hellenic culture in the eastern Mediterranian, they tried to spread their own latin culture (with little success) and, after the split of the empire in two halves, the Eastern Roman Empire (aka Byzantine Empire) adopted hellenic as primary culture (Basileía Rhōmaíōn).

Byzantine Empire - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

While the Romans weren't actively spreading Greek culture, it did continue to spread in the Roman empire. It's not like the Hellenization of the eastern Mediterranean just halted with the Roman conquest and then suddenly restarted with the formation of the Eastern Roman Empire.

There a plenty of examples of non-Italic languages, religions, rituals, funeral practices, and philosphies spreading during the Roman empire (and I'm sure there are more, but these are the ones I can think of off the top of my head). And what is culture but an amalgamation of all these things.

So non-primary cultures can spread in Empires. And I think it would be more interesting if the game reflected this to some degree (it'd make the cultural landscape more dynamic). Note I'm don't think non-primary cultures should spread as well as your primary culture. But I think accepted cultures should be able to spread, even if it's limited to only certain situations.

 

[absinthewfaust]

I am really looking forward to this update.

 

[___Vardan]

... and Appian ( Syr. 55) suggests that Cappadocia passes directly from Cassander to Seleucus. The latter sent there Amyntas as a stratēgos, but this governor was beaten by Ariarathes II, the son of Perdiccas’ rival, with the support of Ardoates, ruler of Armenia.

why would Armenia help the pretender to keep the throne if there is no vassalage status? after the fall of Antnigonids in Asia minor, Cappadocia and Commagene became Armenian vassals. In time, Seleucids took them and even Armenian sovereignty itself for a brief period. I don't know the exact dates, but the event proposed in the OP looks somewhat realistic.

Edit: any news on the release date?

 

[Cadzon]

Nice! I just feel the slave/freeman thing change sucks... I mean so I'm gonna have to calculate how many I need to send there also now? Because of the risk of promotion... Sure its not very realistic but the game need less of detail micro management, and you want it to be able take care of itself when you have big empires.

I just hope it's back to 100% slave on farm/mine/slave estate when you have those buildings. And not some % when you add them. I'm fine with having different ratio with no buildings.

 

[Jiben]

Nice! I just feel the slave/freeman thing change sucks... I mean so I'm gonna have to calculate how many I need to send there also now? Because of the risk of promotion...

You can turn off slaves promoting if that's your consern.

 

[Glanyr]

Nice! I just feel the slave/freeman thing change sucks... I mean so I'm gonna have to calculate how many I need to send there also now? Because of the risk of promotion... Sure its not very realistic but the game need less of detail micro management, and you want it to be able take care of itself when you have big empires.

I just hope it's back to 100% slave on farm/mine/slave estate when you have those buildings. And not some % when you add them. I'm fine with having different ratio with no buildings.

At least right now you can stop slaves from promoting for a -10% happiness penalty if i'm correct.

Edit: Jiben was a little bit faster. And it's 25 % which might be a lot in the new patch with lower base happiness. But it's probably something you will only take care of in your capital province or for food regions.

 

[Samitte]

why would Armenia help the pretender to keep the throne if there is no vassalage status? after the fall of Antnigonids in Asia minor, Cappadocia and Commagene became Armenian vassals. In time, Seleucids took them and even Armenian sovereignty itself for a brief period. I don't know the exact dates, but the event proposed in the OP looks somewhat realistic.

We simply don't know why they did that. Its mentioned in 1 line of a source 250 years later, which itself was based on highly propagandised works, and which doesn't say a single thing on the why. We have no idea if its actually even true that this is the course of events that put the Ariarathids in power. If I had to speculate, reducing Hellenic influence in the region would be a good contender. Perhaps they wanted a buffer state between them and western Anatolia. Perhaps they did try to establish a satrapy/vassal of their own. Perhaps there was an agreement with Ariarathes II which would grant the Armenians land, power, wealth or something else. Or perhaps there were other reasons in play which we do not know about. But simply assuming it was to create a vassal of sorts should not be assumed to be the default historical reason.

Now if we want to think about a reward for the player then this might be a nice outcome.

(Independent) Commagene did not exist until 163 BCE at the earliest. It only appeared following the turbulent period of Seleukid history during Antiochus III's reign as far as we're aware, and before that belonged to Sophene until the treaty of Apamea. There is as far as I am aware not a single modern historian claiming Commagene was anything but part of the Seleukid or Armenian realm until about 163 BCE. Neither does anyone seem to claim Cappadocia became an Armenian vassal.

Perhaps a third option to the event can be added:

The initial event succeeds, and Ariarathes II controls Cappadocia:

• A: Seleukids or Antigonids accept, Ariarathes II becomes tributary of Armenia. (AI should prefer this if they are weak/neck deep in conflict)
• B: Seleukids or Antigonids are too busy with war and give counteroffer: Ariarathes II becomes satrap of Cappadocia and their vassal, or they go to war. (AI should pick this option most of the time, while it reduces Hellenic influence, it also retains Cappadocia as a vassal) these give Armenia 2 options:
• B1: Armenia accepts. (AI should do this if they feel they cant win)
• B2: Armenia declines and the Seleukids or Antigonids declare war. (AI should do this if they feel they can win the war)
• C: Seleukids or Antigonids don't accept and don't give a counteroffer and immediately declare war on both Cappadocia and Armenia. (AI should do this when they feel they can beat both Armenia and Cappadocia.

 

[Cadzon]

At least right now you can stop slaves from promoting for a -10% happiness penalty if i'm correct.

Edit: Jiben was a little bit faster. And it's 25 % which might be a lot in the new patch with lower base happiness. But it's probably something you will only take care of in your capital province or for food regions.

Yeah, but even if it would be 10%, I still would have click that on every settlement and hit that box. I already try my best to optimise every territory I own, and it takes alot of time and clicks. Eventually you just stop caring. The slave radio thing adds another element to that.

 

[___Vardan]

Commagene did not exist until 163 BCE at the earliest. It only appeared following the turbulent period of Seleukid history during Antiochus III's reign as far as we're aware, and before that belonged to Sophene until the treaty of Apamea. There is as far as I am aware not a single modern historian claiming Commagene was anything but part of the Seleukid or Armenian realm until about 163 BCE. Neither does anyone seem to claim Cappadocia became an Armenian vassal.

Well yes. Commagene was changing hands between Armenia and Seleucids until the fall of Seleucids. But it always was mentioned as a unit. The period is very blurry, however, Commagene along with Sophene and Lesser Armenia were the units rulers of which are related to Armenian Orontids. They all being bordering regions could change hands, unlike the rest of Greater Armenia (I talk of the period up the reign of early Artaxias dynasty). Eventually, Commagene, unlike Sophene, was more Hellenised by the time Tigranes II annexed it. And Lesser Armenia was lost forever.
I definitely shall lookup for sources to get a more clear picture, but I remember from what I had read Sophene and Commagene "bundle" to be disputed between Armenia and Seleucids. I really do not know the exact status of Commagene at the start date, however depicting it as a satrapy at least is accurate, as the unit is regularly mentioned in the books.
still, i don't see it here

Spoiler

[\spoiler]

 

[trjacobin]

View attachment 591593
You can turn off slaves promoting if that's your consern.

Does anyone know a nation-wide switch off for all slaves not being able to promote button? Or any possible solutions that'd do that in essence?

 

[Samitte]

Well yes. Commagene was changing hands between Armenia and Seleucids until the fall of Seleucids. But it always was mentioned as a unit. The period is very blurry, however, Commagene along with Sophene and Lesser Armenia were the units rulers of which are related to Armenian Orontids. They all being bordering regions could change hands, unlike the rest of Greater Armenia (I talk of the period up the reign of early Artaxias dynasty). Eventually, Commagene, unlike Sophene, was more Hellenised by the time Tigranes II annexed it. And Lesser Armenia was lost forever.

Commagene is first mentioned in written sources by Cicero, around 50 BCE. Inbetween Hittite Kummuh and the end of the Achaemenid period, we have some sparse evidence on Commagene, but in the Hellenistic period we have no written sources until the aforementioned letters from Cicero.

I definitely shall lookup for sources to get a more clear picture, but I remember from what I had read Sophene and Commagene "bundle" to be disputed between Armenia and Seleucids. I really do not know the exact status of Commagene at the start date, however depicting it as a satrapy at least is accurate, as the unit is regularly mentioned in the books.

Sophene and Commagene did seem to come as a bundle until the Treaty of Apamea, when the Seleucids were forced to abandon any control over Sophene and Greater Armenia, but Commagene due to its location likely got split off at this point, probably ruled by some Orontid relative. (Note that 'Armenian/Sophenian' Commagene and the later Commagenean state are not the exact same geopolitical units, but were both based on the same core region.) The latest in depth research on Sophene is Marchiak, 2016, though he doesn't include Armenian-language scholarship in this, he reaches the same conclusion as Armenian-language scholarship that Sophene (which included Commagene) emerged as an 'independent' subject (In game terms, a tributary) of the Seleukids by the mid-3rd century. For Armenian language scholarship I do not know the most recent work.

But Commagene had no agency, at all, until around 163 BCE as far as we know, why would it then make sense to depict it as a satrapy? With the foundings of Samosata, and the two Arsameia's, Sophene clearly controlled Commagene, which it likely inherited when it (Sophene) split off from Greater Armenia somewhere after the mid-3rd century. This implies that Commagene was part of Greater Armenia before then, especially if you count in their involvement in Cappadocia. Thus, with the period between the Achaemenids and the reigns of Sames and Arsames, at some point Commagene passed to Greater Armenia. (Unless Sophene acquired Commagene some other way, but Commagene being part of Greater Armenia would help explain their involvement in Cappadocia around 301/280/260 BCE, as it would involve a direct neighbour.)

 

[___Vardan]

Commagene is first mentioned in written sources by Cicero, around 50 BCE. Inbetween Hittite Kummuh and the end of the Achaemenid period, we have some sparse evidence on Commagene, but in the Hellenistic period we have no written sources until the aforementioned letters from Cicero.



Sophene and Commagene did seem to come as a bundle until the Treaty of Apamea, when the Seleucids were forced to abandon any control over Sophene and Greater Armenia, but Commagene due to its location likely got split off at this point, probably ruled by some Orontid relative. (Note that 'Armenian/Sophenian' Commagene and the later Commagenean state are not the exact same geopolitical units, but were both based on the same core region.) The latest in depth research on Sophene is Marchiak, 2016, though he doesn't include Armenian-language scholarship in this, he reaches the same conclusion as Armenian-language scholarship that Sophene (which included Commagene) emerged as an 'independent' subject (In game terms, a tributary) of the Seleukids by the mid-3rd century. For Armenian language scholarship I do not know the most recent work.

But Commagene had no agency, at all, until around 163 BCE as far as we know, why would it then make sense to depict it as a satrapy? With the foundings of Samosata, and the two Arsameia's, Sophene clearly controlled Commagene, which it likely inherited when it (Sophene) split off from Greater Armenia somewhere after the mid-3rd century. This implies that Commagene was part of Greater Armenia before then, especially if you count in their involvement in Cappadocia. Thus, with the period between the Achaemenids and the reigns of Sames and Arsames, at some point Commagene passed to Greater Armenia. (Unless Sophene acquired Commagene some other way, but Commagene being part of Greater Armenia would help explain their involvement in Cappadocia around 301/280/260 BCE, as it would involve a direct neighbour.)

yeah, i must agree with you. i have never met direct info on Commagene for the timeline the game starts, however, from the events that followed afterwards one can derive that both Sophene and Commagene (in addition to Lesser Armenia) were parts of Greater Armenia back then. it was Seleucids policy trying to grant souverinity to these regions to split them from Greater Armenia. I mean the term Greater Armenia itself (if i am not mistaking) emerged during early Artaxias kings when these little Armenian kingdoms of Commagene, Sophene and Lesser Armenia separated from the former Orontind Kingdom. The term was to mention the core bigger-among-others kingdom Artaxis I inherited.

 

[Niekolaus]

Is the Antigonid Kingdom going to get a decision (like Epirus) to form Macedon, if they control Pella and Macedon no longer exist as a state?

Will Paradox rename Thrace into the Lysimachid Kingdom (please, please, please....) and maybe also turn early Egypt into the Ptolemaic Kingdom?

Just like with Cappadocia wouldn't it be cool if this Ptolemaic Kingdom of Egypt had an early event (maybe following the death of Ptolemy I Soter) to change its traditions, religion and culture? Enabling it to change its Macedonian culture, Greek traditions and Hellenic religion to an Egyptian culture with Kemetic religion and "Levantine and Arabian" traditions?

 

[Glanyr]

Is the Antigonid Kingdom going to get a decision (like Epirus) to form Macedon, if they control Pella and Macedon no longer exist as a state?

Will Paradox rename Thrace into the Lysimachid Kingdom (please, please, please....) and maybe also turn early Egypt into the Ptolemaic Kingdom?

Just like Cappadocia shouldn't the Ptolemaic Kingdom of Egypt have an early event (maybe following the death of Ptolemy I Soter) to change its traditions, religion and culture? If they decides to give up their Macedonian heritage (Hellenic traditions and religion) and become a true Egyptian dynasty with the Kemetic religion and "Levantine and Arabian" traditions?

I only played egypt a little back in 1.1 but if i remember correct you had the choice to give up hellenic religion and adopt the kemetic ones.

 

[Niekolaus]

I only played egypt a little back in 1.1 but if i remember correct you had the choice to give up hellenic religion and adopt the kemetic ones.

You are right, I forgot to add the changing of Macedonian culture to Egyptian culture...

Currently Egypt also starts with "Levantine and Arabian" traditions, I would like those to be changed to Greek traditions from the start and then let the player decide whether to become Egyptian or remain Macedonian.

 

[DC123456789]

You are right, I forgot to add the changing of Macedonian culture to Egyptian culture...

Currently Egypt also starts with "Levantine and Arabian" traditions, I would like those to be changed to Greek traditions from the start and then let the player decide whether to become Egyptian or remain Macedonian. The AI should always chose to become Egyptian and get new traditions, religion and culture.

That event already has the option to convert to Egyptian culture. Not sure how accurate it would be for the AI to convert all the time though.

 

[Niekolaus]

That event already has the option to convert to Egyptian culture. Not sure how accurate it would be for the AI to convert all the time though.

During the reign of Ptolemy III Euergetes around 246 BC (Ptolemy I Soter's grandchild) the gradual Egyptianisation of the Ptolemaic dynasty began IRL.

 

[Niekolaus]

Is the Antigonid Kingdom going to get a decision (like Epirus) to form Macedon, if they control Pella, parts of the Macedonian heartland and Macedon no longer exist as a state in-game?

This would enable the Antigonids to become rulers of Macedon as IRL