Important Suggestion!!! Mamluk Sultans and their culture

[Qutb87]

Great mod I have to say. A suggestion!

Is it possible to amend the culture of certain Egypt based rulers in the game. I am referring of course to the mamluk rulers from 1250 onward but also other earlier 'mamluk' dynasties such as the Tulunids. The utterly anachronistic 'Egyptian' they are referred in the vanilla game is completely out of kilter (I feel) with the whole HIP ethos.

They were not nor did they in anyway identify themselves with the native local Egyptian population or culture.
In fact under the Bahri sultans, they almost always referred to their dominions as Dawlat al-Atrak (State of the Turks). During the Burji period they would also sometimes say Dawlat Al-Jarakisa (I think state of Circassians or some such).

The named and known historical Bahri period sultans barring a few exceptions (Kitbuqha who was Mongol) should all be classed as Kipchak in the game. Only Qutuz receives a decent designation as he is classed as 'Turk' in vanilla I believe.

A number of the 'Duke' and 'Count' level vassals should also receive this cultural designation as opposed to the 'Egyptian' they are classed as. Since many emirs would have also been Mamluk. Vanilla actually sort of reflects this (Sunqur in Damascus etc)

Aside from being more accurate it would also ensure they have access to the retinues which made the Mamluks famous i.e horse archers! Ideally the game would enable khassakiyah type retinues as horse archers and heavy cavalry mixes but the generic horse archer retinues would be fine.
It would therefore also be an improvement on the incredibly anachronistic 'camel cavalry' special retinue that has completely swamped vanilla since ROI!

Would it be possible in future to make it so they reflect their historical culture and ethnicity?

Also is it possible to create a specific 'Mamluk' trait for characters in the relevant Muslim regions? Similar to the Viking raider or Varangian traits already present. A boost to marshal but with a penalty on diplomacy would be very good. After all, the Ilkhan did disparagingly address Qutuz as a slave purchased in Siwas.

Perhaps an intrigue button where one 'purchases Mamluks' or something to that effect? Thus appearing Kipchak marshals/spymasters etc in your court with said traits.
Existing historical Mamluks Aybak,Qutuz, Baibars etc would also have this trait.

I would do all of this myself had I the modding skills, but alas I am reduced to sniping suggestions from the peanut gallery.

 

[Qutb87]

Bump. No other thoughts on this?

 

[BigPharma]

I think this would wonderful for flavor. It should probably be posted in the VIET forums though and maybe included as part of a larger flavor pack.

 

[Cardinal Sin]

I am not sure. Of course it would be accurate but I think the Mamlukes are Egyptian for the same reason that Saladin is Egyptian - to avoid stupid and utterly senseless nationalist revolts, and also to prevent the likes of Cairo, Alexandria and Aswan from becoming Kipchak or Turkish.

 

[theKing1988]

I am not sure. Of course it would be accurate but I think the Mamlukes are Egyptian for the same reason that Saladin is Egyptian - to avoid stupid and utterly senseless nationalist revolts, and also to prevent the likes of Cairo, Alexandria and Aswan from becoming Kipchak or Turkish.

That is indeed my concern as well

 

[elvain]

maybe it might be somehow workable. But not solely within SWMH scope, perhaps in a submod or so or in VIET. But I think there is another issue which needs to be taken into account.

I might be wrong but AFAIK the Mamluk rulers of Egypt usually did not live like nomads with their hordes somewhere in steppes with their nomadic herds.
Therefore I don't think it would even be historicaly accurate to give them the same culture like Seljuk and his ancestors.

Even though the mamluks were ethnicaly and maybe some of them even used Turkic/other languages of their nomadic origin, they weren't Turks like those who lived in the steppe.
For instance, there was a cultural difference between Mahmud of Ghazna or even Sebüktegīn, who were originaly Tuskish slaves of Persian rulers, and between their Turkic contemporaries in the Steppe.
For the upcomming SWMH map expansion to Central Asia it will partialy be solved with overhaul of Turkish cultures with dynamic changes where you will have various outcomes if various Turkic nomadic cultures rule over sedentary populations mostly of Persia, where the Seljuks or Ghaznavids will have different culture than say Qarakhanids and their impact on local populations will be different.
But with Mamluks it is even more complicated. Despite their ethnicity and language they were culturaly 'Egyptized' to some extent.

A propper solution may be a special culture for Turkish mamluks which wouldn't affect local populations' cultures but I'm not sure if it would be possible, effective and even accurate, though I believe it would be the most historically accurate solutions

 

[Qutb87]

^^^It is true that they were settled and no longer living from the saddle so to speak. As you say the Seljuks ruled over settled non-Turkic groups and quickly adopted the urban Islamic Persian culture, but we still do not refer to them as Persian in game or historically. They still overwhelmingly viewed themselves ultimately as being of Turkic stock.


Actually far more so with the various Egyptian Mamluks whether Turkic or Circassian. Primary sources, their own biographers as well as subsequent modern research clearly shows a complete identification with their Turkic or Circassian roots at the expense of any local subject culture or ethnic group.

The language of the barracks and internal administration would have been their native tongues.
There is even some recent debate as to whether being of 'slave origin' was always the sole source of legitimacy for certain periods. Instead more and more it seems language and culture was heavily emphasized throughout.

Qalawun and his non-slave dynastic progeny in particular promoted their Kipchak stock as an actual validation for their rule. There are also clear demarcations within the Mamluks themselves. Especially early on between the established Kipchak groups and recent Mongol emigres. For instance Kitbugha's reign is disparagingly referred to by his hostile successors as the "Mongol State".

Of course I don't suggest such intricacies be replicated! But it must be said that they were not part of nor were they heavily influenced at all by the local 'Egyptian' culture whatever that may have been viewed as.

It would also really help because it would mean they can actually have retinues far more reflective of historical reality. Namely horse archers as opposed to camel cavalry. Mamluks without horse archers is like Normans without cavalry!

I am not sure. Of course it would be accurate but I think the Mamlukes are Egyptian for the same reason that Saladin is Egyptian - to avoid stupid and utterly senseless nationalist revolts, and also to prevent the likes of Cairo, Alexandria and Aswan from becoming Kipchak or Turkish.

Yes unfortunately this issue did occur to me after I posted as a reason not to. Would definitely be an anachronism.

 

[Cardinal Sin]

That being said, it is also ludicrous how in vanilla, Southern Italy just goes Norman at some stage. This gap is certainly filled by the Sicilian culture here.

I think a Mameluke culture that does not evoke any culture penalties and would not convert provinces would be a good thing for Egypt, but not sure if that would be possible. Moreover, it should be able that it arises naturally in the course of the game... perhaps whoever rules the Mamluk army should also have a claim to Egypt?

 

[Teutonic_Thrash]

I'd definitely like the Mamluk rulers to have some sort of Turkic culture. The Mamluk rulers in India already are of Turkish culture.

 

[SignedName]

That being said, it is also ludicrous how in vanilla, Southern Italy just goes Norman at some stage. This gap is certainly filled by the Sicilian culture here.

I think a Mameluke culture that does not evoke any culture penalties and would not convert provinces would be a good thing for Egypt, but not sure if that would be possible. Moreover, it should be able that it arises naturally in the course of the game... perhaps whoever rules the Mamluk army should also have a claim to Egypt?

Mercenaries can already revolt and take territory, and the Mamluks start as a vassalized mercenary of the Fatimids, if I'm not mistaken.