Increasing duchy historicality and revisiting their borders

[unmerged(21937)]

There was nothing similar as Duchy of Nicea. I urge you to look at other historical maps of the area and you will see Bithynia, Opsicion, etc. Euratlas didn't just come up with these names. The thing is that very little is known about Byzantine duchies.

Even if there is Bithynia and Opsicion on the maps, it can easily mean only that they were Thema.

And I know there was no "duchy of Nicaea", it represents the "Empire of Nicaea", which existed after 4th Crusade.

 

[unmerged(27913)]

Even if there is Bithynia and Opsicion on the maps, it can easily mean only that they were Thema.

You seem not to understand how Byzantne duchies worked. Themas are Duchies in Byzantine Empire...that is the whole point. Byznatium worked by the old Roman setup...divide the area by provinces(themas) and assign them governers.

And I know there was no "duchy of Nicaea", it represents the "Empire of Nicaea", which existed after 4th Crusade.

I am aware of that but I think making duchies according to Crusaders states is highly ahistorical.

In any case I was just point out that Euratlas was not wrong but that it just follows already established division of Byzantium in that era.

Btw. the current setup you are using was outdated by 1066.

 

[unmerged(21937)]

I am aware of that but I think making duchies according to Crusaders states is highly ahistorical.

And we disagree.

Btw. the current setup you are using was outdated by 1066.

If you have more up-to date map, you can of course point me to it.

EDIT: And Themes are military provinces, no?

EDIT2: And either were extinct system by 1066 or became extinct the era of Alexios.

I just checked a map of Themata in Basil II's era (1025), which didn't have any borders drawn on it, but the names and their positions don't contradict my proposal.

 

[unmerged(21937)]

My previous proposal would look like this on map:

EDIT: Removed map, see later post for map of Anatolia and Levant.

Duchies, from west to east and north to south, excluding those on previous map, unless they have changed:
- Aegean Islands, red
- Samos, blue
- Nicaea, purple
- Thracesia, cyan
- Cibyrrhaeot, white
- Anatolia, green
- Paphlagonia, yellow
- Charsianon, blue
- Armenia Minor, red
- Armeniakon, cyan
- Trebizond, white
- Koloneia, purple
- Mesopotamia, yellow

 

[Veldmaarschalk]

Well it covers the Byzantine Themes (or Themata) upset quit nicely. And as you said before Themes started out as military 'districts' which combined civil and military jurisdiction under the command of a general (strategos) who had the title of Patrician. We can't compare the Byzantine society with the western society, the byzantines didn't have a fuedal system, the strategoi were appointed by the emperor, mostly from the high noble families from the capital, they served a certain amount of time in their theme and then either rotated to another theme or went back to the capital, later this system broke down.

I guess you use the name Armenia Minor instead of Seleucia to represent the 'kingdom of Armenia minor' ?

 

[unmerged(21937)]

I guess you use the name Armenia Minor instead of Seleucia to represent the 'kingdom of Armenia minor' ?

It actually holds both Seleucia and Cilicia themes, but yes.

Russia is next in line to be filled, though you may always comment and suggest improvements to previous setups.

For Russia, I know duchy of Chernigov should be added. Also Moskva should get another province to it's area. Is there anything else important missing or any other changes to be done that you can think from the top of your head?

 

[Veldmaarschalk]

I can't think of something important missing here, just wondering why we have the Duchy of Pronsk since it was known as Novgorod-Seversk on my maps ? Is the last name to long ?

Also Vladimir and Suzdal were united prinicipalities for most of the time.

To Moskva, the county south of it could be added.

 

[unmerged(21937)]

Hmm, a quick search of Pronsk gives rather contraditing info.

This page here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_early_East_Slavic_states, gives Pronsk as a duchy existing 1129-1465, but this page here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ryazan says "At certain points during its history the Prince of Ryazan was also known as the Prince of Pronsk, after a town or region south of Ryazan." and curiously the existance of Ryazan in the former page is given 1129-1510.

So I'm pretty sure Pronsk = Ryazan, so Pronsk should go.

 

[unmerged(21937)]

A proposal for Russia:

- Polotsk: Polotsk, Orsha, West Dvina (normal setup)
- Pskov: Pskov, Velikiye Luki (normal setup)
- Turov-Pinsk: Turov, Pinsk, Minsk (has been in earlier map already)
- Kiev: Terebovl, Kiev, Torki, Korsun (has been in earlier map already)
- Pereyaslavl: Pereyaslavl, Sharukan, Chortitza (adopting Finellach's)
- Chernigov: Chernigov, Lyubech (adopting Finellach's)
- (Novgorod-)Seversky: Novgorod Seversky, Pronsk, Mordva (my design)
- Smolensk: Vitebsk, Smolensk, Vyazma, Mstislavl (adopting Finellach's)
- Tver: Tver, Uglich (normal setup)
- Novgorod: Starya Russa, Novgorod, Vodi, Torzhok, Bezhetsky Vehr (normal setup)
- Muscovy: Moskva, Bryansk (adopting Finellach's)
- Rostov: Rostov, Pereyaslavl Zalesky (normal setup)
- Beloozero: Beloozero, Vologda, Zaoerzye, Chud, Romny (adopting Finellach's)
- Yaroslavl: Yaroslavl, Kostroma (normal setup)
- Suzdal: Suzdal, Gorodez, Galich Mersky (normal setup)
- Vladimir: Vladimir, Kolomna (normal setup)
- Ryazan: Murom, Ryazan, Nizhny Novgorod (my design)
- Bjarmia: Onega, Transportage, North Dvina, Bjarmia, Samoyeds (normal setup)
- Hlynov: Ugra, Syrj, Hlynov, Veliky Ustug (adopting Finellach's)
- Cheremisa: Mozhaysk, Merya, Grassland Cheremisa, Chuvash, Mountain Cheremisa, Burtasy (my design)

I decided against the merging of Vladimir & Suzdal, becuase they resulting sausage-like creatable area would look awful.

 

[Veldmaarschalk]

Well I can't find much against this setup, so according to me it looks fine.


Russia and Asia Minor done in 1 day .

 

[unmerged(21937)]

When we are done with Russia, we should proceed to the remaining territories where there was significant christian presence during CK era. Namely, Caucasus and Levant.

Also, what should we do with the lands not really held by christians during CK era? Keep current setup, tweak it a little here and there or draw new setup based on historical emirates and then call them with latin names for their regions or the emirates themselves?

 

[Veldmaarschalk]

Well for the non-christian lands I would leave the setup as it is right now, maybe change some of the names to a more latin form so we wouldn't have a christian duchy named Al Jazira, or wait isn't the same tag used by
the arabic/turkish emir ? Then we can't change the name.

They are all fantasy duchies anyway and all large enough to I think.

Levant
For the levant I only would suggest to increase the Duchy of Galilee with the county of Jerusalem and rename the duchy of Palesting to either Acre or Jaffa. And maybe ad a county to the principality of Antiochia.

 

[unmerged(21937)]

Proposal for Levant, based on Wiki's articles about vassals of the Kingdom of Jerusalem and this map

- Jaffa (former Ascalon): Darum, Beershab, Ascalon, Jaffa
- Oultrejourdain: Negev, Monreal, Hebron, Kerak, Amman
- Jerusalem (royal territory for whole period): Jerusalem, Acre
- Galilee: Tiberias, Tyre, Beirut, Safed
- Tripoli: Tripoli, Tortosa, Baalbek, Archa
- Antioch: Alexandretta, Antiocheia
- Edessa: Aintab, Edessa, Tell Bashir

As you can see from Galilee's description, it's territory (vassals) expanded to the north, all the way to Beirut. Tyre on the other hand wasn't as important realm, so it has to give way. Since it appears "count of Jaffa" was the primary title of Jaffa and Ascalon, also earlier conquered as well, I don't see why the duchy based on it should be Ascalon nor why it should not have Jaffa. Oultrejourdain's territory extended all the way to Gulf of Aqaba, so they could justifiably have Eilat as well, but I think that would make it look too odd. Negev on the other hand is better in Oultrejourdain than Jaffa.

EDIT: Archa could be put to Antioch too, I'd say. It's not historically necessary to have it in Tripoli and other options to add to Antioch are not very good options.

EDIT2: Changed Acre / Palestine to Jerusalem to represent / be named after patriarchate of Jerusalem.

 

[Calgacus]

Proposal for Levant, based on Wiki's articles about vassals of the Kingdom of Jerusalem and this map

- Jaffa (former Ascalon): Darum, Beershab, Ascalon, Jaffa
- Oultrejourdain: Negev, Monreal, Hebron, Kerak, Amman
- Acre / Palestine (royal territory for whole period): Jerusalem, Acre
- Galilee: Tiberias, Tyre, Beirut, Safed
- Tripoli: Tripoli, Tortosa, Baalbek, Archa
- Antioch: Alexandretta, Antiocheia
- Edessa: Aintab, Edessa, Tell Bashir

There is also the Patriarchate of Jerusalem to consider. Over my time, I've enjoyed appointing him as Bishop of Hebron (I wanted to keep Jerusalem), and Archbishop of Palestine.


Regarding Russia, I'd recommend incorporatiung Pskov into Novgorod. Vladimir and Suzdakl should be merged too, but I'm not clear I understand the reasons against that.

 

[unmerged(21937)]

There is also the Patriarchate of Jerusalem to consider. Over my time, I've enjoyed appointing him as Bishop of Hebron (I wanted to keep Jerusalem), and Archbishop of Palestine.

Ah, thank you. Excellent suggestion, as we already have several duchies named after clerical fiefs.

Regarding Russia, I'd recommend incorporatiung Pskov into Novgorod. Vladimir and Suzdakl should be merged too, but I'm not clear I understand the reasons against that.

Novgorod would be rather large then. Pskov existed as an inpedendent realm from (formally) 1348 to 1510 as well. If it were crowded there, I would agree, but since removing Pskov gives us seven province Novgorod and there is very little else to share it's vast territory to, I'd rather not.

I oppose merging Vladimir and Suzdal, because it would look like this:

on a map. Vladimir-Suzdal is the red one in the middle. If you can point out where provinces from it's end(s) should go, it could be considered.

 

[Veldmaarschalk]

Proposal for Levant, based on Wiki's articles about vassals of the Kingdom of Jerusalem and this map

- Jaffa (former Ascalon): Darum, Beershab, Ascalon, Jaffa
- Oultrejourdain: Negev, Monreal, Hebron, Kerak, Amman
- Jerusalem (royal territory for whole period): Jerusalem, Acre
- Galilee: Tiberias, Tyre, Beirut, Safed
- Tripoli: Tripoli, Tortosa, Baalbek, Archa
- Antioch: Alexandretta, Antiocheia
- Edessa: Aintab, Edessa, Tell Bashir

As you can see from Galilee's description, it's territory (vassals) expanded to the north, all the way to Beirut. Tyre on the other hand wasn't as important realm, so it has to give way. Since it appears "count of Jaffa" was the primary title of Jaffa and Ascalon, also earlier conquered as well, I don't see why the duchy based on it should be Ascalon nor why it should not have Jaffa. Oultrejourdain's territory extended all the way to Gulf of Aqaba, so they could justifiably have Eilat as well, but I think that would make it look too odd. Negev on the other hand is better in Oultrejourdain than Jaffa.

EDIT: Archa could be put to Antioch too, I'd say. It's not historically necessary to have it in Tripoli and other options to add to Antioch are not very good options.

EDIT2: Changed Acre / Palestine to Jerusalem to represent / be named after patriarchate of Jerusalem.

Don't have much time this weekend. But your setup looks good and historical.

 

[unmerged(27913)]

Ascalon renamed to Jaffa....I don't know about that.
Removing Tyre is wrong IMO, Galilee should be composed of Tiberias and Jerusalem. There should also be Duchy /Principality of Acre. Also Antioch should hold Teluch and Aleppo, Negev certainly shouldn't be in Oultrejourdain(Jordan).

Btw. this last is another issue. OUtlrejourdain is French and means 'beyond [the river]Jordan'. I suggest renaming it simply to Jordan.

 

[Calgacus]

Novgorod would be rather large then. Pskov existed as an inpedendent realm from (formally) 1348 to 1510 as well. If it were crowded there, I would agree, but since removing Pskov gives us seven province Novgorod and there is very little else to share it's vast territory to, I'd rather not.

Yes. I'm not incline to stick so much of the FInnmark in Novgorod's declarable territory ... it didn't actually "rule" many of these areas in anything but name.

Pskov was a de facto vassal of Lithuania for a part of that period. But Pskov is a county, and doesn't need a Duke-level title to be "independent" ... which it never was in theory.

I oppose merging Vladimir and Suzdal, because it would look like this:

on a map. Vladimir-Suzdal is the red one in the middle. If you can point out where provinces from it's end(s) should go, it could be considered.

Theoretically Vladimir-Suzdal would contain Rostov, Tver, Moskva and Yaroslavl', with parts of Beloozero and Hlynov. This, for me, is the ideal duchy set-up. Cities such as Tver, Pskov and others are represented at county level.

Taking for granted the absence of "the Kingdom of Rus," marked in purple are principalities which were Grand Princes at a time. The ruler of Galich-Volynia also used the title, but this doesn't seem to have been recognized.

I reckon the chances of you adopting this set-up aren't much higher than Belarus winning the world-cup. (EDIT: See Below)

Unfortunately, the way they've drawn the map and named, the city of Vladimir lies in the province of Moskva, not Vladimir. Moskva (didn't exist until the late 12th century) was always part of Vladimir, either as a border outpost, or a competitor (with Tver) for Khan's iarlyk as Grand Prince of Vladimir and All Rus'.

The Duchies of Bjarmia, Viatka/Khlynov (Perm' ?) and Mordva and/or Cheremisa can take care of the non-Rus'ian "Russian" territories to the north and east.

 

[Calgacus]

I'll take it for granted Vladimir is too big. Here I've divided it up, roughly corresponding to how it was owned in the later period of the game. Beloozero, of course, never existed .. was controlled by Moscow, as was Kostromo, but it seems the best way:

I'd suggest that the whole Rus' problem could be solved by giving Kiev a non-recreatable King title for the 1066 scenario, and Vladimir a non-recreatable King title for 1187 and 1337, owned by Moscow in 1337 (Tver with claim). (Of course, with the appropriate princes in vassalage, and claims on those who aren't). These tags are already available for Novgorod-Severesky and Minsk. Just a matter of swapping.

 

[Enravota]

acctualy these are ducal titles, and the kingdom shields are a glitch