Theological differences between Copts and Orthodox are far to large for them to go to Coptic. If the Orthodox were to shift to something else, it would either be Catholic, or to some form of Protestantism or an independent Patriarchy.
- 1
More formable countries
- Thread starter LDC7
- Start date
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Theological differences between Copts and Orthodox are far to large for them to go to Coptic. If the Orthodox were to shift to something else, it would either be Catholic, or to some form of Protestantism or an independent Patriarchy.
While this might sound somewhat true by 19th century, Europe was not 'socio-culturally similar' thing back in late medieval and early modern era to be unified that easily.
- 2
Europe, however, in mediëval times was simply defined by the extent of christian rule
By Copts I mean not only religion, but also original population of Egypt. Sadly it is not represented in Eu4, though it could use name of Old Egyptian for example.
It could be not formable, but a revolter tag as well, however liberating or forming it like Jerusalem for coptic states would be cool.
If the Sultante of Rum should be added it should certainly be the cultural union of the Oghuz group and also the primary culture of the Turkish culture.
(The Sultanate of Rum was the true successor to the Seljuk Empire which is historically the part where Turks/Azeris and Türkmen splitt from each other and all three view the Seljuks as their ancestors)
(The Sultanate of Rum was the true successor to the Seljuk Empire which is historically the part where Turks/Azeris and Türkmen splitt from each other and all three view the Seljuks as their ancestors)
- 3
And then it always replaces the Ottoman tag (instead of being a subordinate title as iRL).
Not to mention the Ottomans were just one of many beyliks (albeit the strongest) at gamestart.
- 1
What i'd like to see is more colonial nation formables, especially in the mexican region.
- 1
Which are out of EU4's time-span, not to mention they were all breakaway republics from mexico (rather than actual colonial revolters) that encompassed rather small areas of the Mexican region.
- 2
Que? The Orthodox do not like very Protestant and Reformed. Iconoclasm, Universal priesthood, relativism biblical, negationism tradition (Sola scriptura) etc. Orthodoxy and the modern western Christian denominations stand on completely different fronts. We even abhorring Protestant and Reformed.We even have disgust to Protestant and Reformed.
Unions the Catholic Church was based on political-military force Catholic countries. So if Coptic countries was a powerfull and Orthodox will have regress - should be possible conversion to Coptism.
So rebel tag - not new formable country.
They should also make Ethiopia the Cushitic cultural union.
- 4
True, but the Ottoman events and decisions are connected to that tag, becoming Rum (which they could do before 1470) would end all these.
Also, an Oghuz union is pretty useless in any way. Azeri is a minor culture, and so is Turkmeni, which is geographically isolated, too.
Because of that i would support that the Ottomans cant form the sultanate of Rum since it would be a reward of Anatolian beyliks defeating the Ottomans.
(The same could be applied to Khiva since forming persia is more logical for the Azeri cultures)
The reason i would support it as a cultural union is simply for historical flavour since they are the true successors of the Seljuk empire ,who the Azeris and Türkmen also view as their father nation.
You clearly don't know much about Coptic theology, as there are far wider gaps between it and Orthodox than there are between Orthodox and Protestant/Catholic (and the Orthodox certainly condemned them as heretics as well). They're not even Chalcedonian Christians, while Catholics/Protestants are. There's also the matter of distance, and Alexandria is much further away and isolated from Constantinople and Moscow than Rome. The problem with your line of alt-history thinking is that you're applying twenty-first century opinions, conveniences and thought process' to the fifteenth century.
Likewise, when Byzantine Orthodoxy did begin to regress and they began looking for unions with another church (one which certainly wasn't brought about by military force), they certainly didn't convert to Copticism: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_of_Florence, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_VIII_Palaiologos,
Could fit, considering the Ottomans were more of a Turkish-Greek amalgam culture. Forming Sultanate of Rum should require Ottoman extinction in that case. (and at least ownership of Constaninople, the title "Rum" does need at least some claim to Roman inheritance)
The Rum part has no link to Constantinople. Anatolia was considered to be 'Roman', so it was the Sultanate of Rum because it was in Roman lands. Has no claim to inheriting the Roman legacy.
- 2