The bizarre Jewish state of Khazar

[Kalderus]

From academic point of view medieval Ethiopian history is a huge mess, we don't even know for certain how long Zagwe dynasty ruled. There's plenty of folklore about Jewish Kingdom in Ethiopia, but not that many actual facts and historians have different theories. Lorehead mentioned earlier Kaplan's theory that Kingdom Semien was established only in the late middle ages. But naturally people of this forum have different views about the Ethiopian history than which Paradox has selected.

And while I agree with some posters that medieval Jews had important positions as courtiers especially in Iberia, it's probably easier to leave them out so you don't have to simulate stuff like Granada massacre of 1066 or European pogroms during the crusades or expulsions of the Jews. That might be bit touchy subject to some. Some flavour events about philosophers like Maimonides would be nice though.

Yes, it would be a touchy subject, but as I already stated, Paradox already lets us persecute heretics, so allowing us to pick and choose who can or can't be persecuted is again some sort of silliness. If they think religious persecution is bad taste in general, then they should have left the "I will strike at the heretics" choice out of the game as well.

 

[Veldmaarschalk]

Yes, it would be a touchy subject, but as I already stated, Paradox already lets us persecute heretics, so allowing us to pick and choose who can or can't be persecuted is again some sort of silliness. If they think religious persecution is bad taste in general, then they should have left the "I will strike at the heretics" choice out of the game as well.

And again, this is not the reason that there are no Jews in the game.

 

[Olaus Petrus]

Yes, it would be a touchy subject, but as I already stated, Paradox already lets us persecute heretics, so allowing us to pick and choose who can or can't be persecuted is again some sort of silliness. If they think religious persecution is bad taste in general, then they should have left the "I will strike at the heretics" choice out of the game as well.

Like Veldmaarschalk said it's not the reason why there aren't any Jews in the game. It was just my personal view that historically Jewish courtiers were sometimes persecuted and if you could do that in game it could cause some controversy. I'm sorry if this caused some confusion and you thought that it's the reason why Paradox hasn't added Jews into CKII. And while you can strike against heretics and convert people, crusaders don't get option to massacre the Muslims of Jerusalem, like they did historically. The truth is that Jewish courtiers don't serve much purpose in game, because those Jews who became politically important like Pierleoni family in Rome converted, and having flavour religion just for random courtiers wouldn't make much sense.

 

[vertinox]

The kingdom of Semien isn't in the game (to small to insignificant) and even if it was nobody knows for sure if they were Jewish or any name of its rulers during the ck2 period.

And even if we assume that they are Jewish, then it would still be just one province. And there are several other minor cuktures/religions not represented. Like f.e the Guanche in the Canary Islands or Albanians (while there are Albanians in the game and rhere also was a kingdom of Albania).

I usually don't disagree with you Veld, but can you point to any online document that says the Kingdom of Semien was not Jewish. I know the only source I've found about the kingdom being Jewish is wikipedia and that doesn't say much other than it was Jewish but considering its just wikipedia it might not mean much. If there is a source out there that says otherwise I'd be interesting in learning more about the kingdom?

 

[Lorehead]

I usually don't disagree with you Veld, but can you point to any online document that says the Kingdom of Semien was not Jewish. I know the only source I've found about the kingdom being Jewish is wikipedia and that doesn't say much other than it was Jewish but considering its just wikipedia it might not mean much. If there is a source out there that says otherwise I'd be interesting in learning more about the kingdom?

That Wikipedia article is garbage. It name-drops the Steven Kaplan book I brought up earlier in the thread, which is on Google Books, but none of the editors seem to have read it and the article is almost entirely unsourced.

Kaplan in fact writes, “Only in the second half of the sixteenth century do the Beta Israel appear to have achieved a relatively high degree of political centralization and religious articulation. Only in this period do the rulers of the Falasha, at least in Semien, appear to have governed a well organized community with a clearly articulated religious system.” That would be a century after the end date of the game. He later says that “some caution should be exercised before we refer to even this form of government as a ‘kingdom,’” noting that it was a tributary of the Ethiopian empire. He does, however, say that Ayhud, another name for Ethiopian Jews, were sometimes “regional governors whose subjects included both ayhud and Christians” in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries.

So, that would be an online document, originally published by New York University Press, that argues there was no Jewish kingdom in Ethiopia between 1066 and 1453.

 

[theKing1988]

That Wikipedia article is garbage. It name-drops the Steven Kaplan book I brought up earlier in the thread, which is on Google Books, but none of the editors seem to have read it and the article is almost entirely unsourced.

Kaplan in fact writes, “Only in the second half of the sixteenth century do the Beta Israel appear to have achieved a relatively high degree of political centralization and religious articulation. Only in this period do the rulers of the Falasha, at least in Semien, appear to have governed a well organized community with a clearly articulated religious system.” That would be a century after the end date of the game. He later says that “some caution should be exercised before we refer to even this form of government as a ‘kingdom,’” noting that it was a tributary of the Ethiopian empire. He does, however, say that Ayhud, another name for Ethiopian Jews, were sometimes “regional governors whose subjects included both ayhud and Christians” in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries.

So, that would be an online document, originally published by New York University Press, that argues there was no Jewish kingdom in Ethiopia between 1066 and 1453.

Well that does paint quite a different picture, now doesn't it.

 

[grisamentum]

Taking loans happens automatically as an abstract game mechanic, which is fine with me — even though I'd like the option to take loans whenever I wish, not only when I'm bankrupt!

The persecution of Jews, or any other ethnic/religious group for that matter, is a no-go in every single Paradox game for very good reasons, and discussing this will not lead anywhere, nor will it ever be implemented (as Liam has stated already).

Except persecution is already in the game - with the Pope's constant request to imprison heretics and force-convert heretic strongholds.

The idea that "persecution" is a "no-go" is total nonsense.

 

[StephenT]

He does, however, say that Ayhud, another name for Ethiopian Jews, were sometimes “regional governors whose subjects included both ayhud and Christians” in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries.

I've just been reading another article by Steven Kaplan here (JSTOR access needed), where he says that calling the ayhud "Ethiopian Jews" is itself a major simplification. Although the name does literally mean 'Jews' - which is presumably why outside writers like the Muslim chronicler referred to above talk about Jews in Ethiopia - the word ayhud was actually used in the Ethiopian context to mean 'rebels', 'pagans' or 'Christian heretics'. Kaplan quotes a decree of Emperor Zar'a Ya'eqob which brands as "ayhud" people who seek the help of pagan magicians before going into battle:

"If you are a priest, your priesthood shall be stripped from you, and if you are a Christian you shall be called ayhudawi."


Ethiopian religion is complex because it included elements of paganism (spirit worship, magic rituals), Judaism and Christianity all mixed together. The official Ethiopian Church - acknowledged as Christian - practised circumcision, followed the Jewish dietary laws, and celebrated the Sabbath on Saturday. Meanwhile the Falasha people, now claimed to be Jews, practiced Orthodox Christian-style monasticism and offered prayers to the Virgin Mary!

To quote Kaplan:

"Overall, the religious system of the Beta Israel had far more in common with that of Ethiopian Christians than it had with that of any outside Jewish group."

However, the rise of a centralising empire around 1420 or so, which was explicitly Christian and defined its opponents as heretics, put pressure on the scattered tribal communities of the Semien region to unite and create a new cultural identity. Since this rejected the Christianity of the Ethiopian State, it perforce became more identified with Judaism; and that was the beginning of the distinctive group known as the Falashas, first mentioned in the 16th century.

 

[StephenT]

Except persecution is already in the game - with the Pope's constant request to imprison heretics and force-convert heretic strongholds.

The idea that "persecution" is a "no-go" is total nonsense.

There's a huge difference between clicking a button to persecute "Fratricelli", a group nobody in the 21st century cares about and few have even heard of, and clicking a button to persecute Jews. It's hardly surprising some people would consider that tasteless.


For that matter, can you imagine the headlines if a media source like the Daily Mail got hold of the story?

Ban this sick filth

A Swedish software company have published a so-called 'game' described by some experts as a Holocaust simulator. In this sick game, you can massacre Jews, drive them out of their homes, confiscate their property - and all for "fun". The game even rewards you for committing atrocities by giving you extra money each time you murder Jews.

When we asked a company spokesman for an explanation of this blatant anti-Semitic propaganda masquerading as entertainment, he refused to comment. However, a self-proclaimed 'fan' on the Paradox Forums, a noted breeding ground of reactionary right-wing ideology, offered the excuse that "It's historical!"

Government ministers promised to investigate the legality of publishing this game under anti-hate speech legislation.

 

[grisamentum]

daily mail does that anyway so i'm not sure i see the problem.

 

[Lorehead]

To quote Kaplan:

"Overall, the religious system of the Beta Israel had far more in common with that of Ethiopian Christians than it had with that of any outside Jewish group."

However, the rise of a centralising empire around 1420 or so, which was explicitly Christian and defined its opponents as heretics, put pressure on the scattered tribal communities of the Semien region to unite and create a new cultural identity. Since this rejected the Christianity of the Ethiopian State, it perforce became more identified with Judaism; and that was the beginning of the distinctive group known as the Falashas, first mentioned in the 16th century.

There’s so much we don’t know about this period of history, and we know even less about the Beta Israel. You could also, from the same set of facts, emphasize that Jews elsewhere accepted the Beta Israel as Jewish (albeit not as Orthodox Jews), whereas Christians didn’t accept them as Christian and eventually subjected them to antisemitism. This by itself would seemingly justify, in game terms, making the Beta Israel a sect within the Jewish religious group: the diplomatic relations would be approximately correct.

It’s unfortunate that investigations of their origins gets tied up with presentist arguments about whether the Beta Israel deserve to be accepted as Jews today and whether they belong in Israel, rather than taking those as given and treating the past as an interesting mystery. It’s as if someone were trying to find out what little he could about his sister’s birth parents, while mean girls were busy gossiping about how she’s not really a member of the family anyway because she’s adopted.

 

[Lorehead]

For that matter, can you imagine the headlines if a media source like the Daily Mail got hold of the story?

Eh, there are a lot of people you can dispossess and confiscate the property of, including any noble you banish and, in the next patch, republics’ trade posts. To clarify, though, rulers in this time period weren’t out for genocide. Forced conversions are in the game already. So the mechanic might be that rulers can impose harsh taxes on their Jewish communities, in the same way that they can on their churches and cities, but if they squeeze too hard, those communities will move elsewhere.

 

[liamgamer55]

For that matter, can you imagine the headlines if a media source like the Daily Mail got hold of the story?

Remember the headlines when the daily mail found out that paradox was publishing magni mundi the game? Oh wait there was none because no one cares. Not only does the daily mail not care about paradox games but people who play paradox games don't generally care about the daily mail.

 

[Fawr]

Khazar is further hampered by a seemingly buggy inability to press holy wars (not on pagans, Muslims, or Christians), so for the first ten years, Issac was twiddling his thumbs, counting his 1 money unit per month from his county and by murder obtained barony (tm). The fabrication seemed like it would never come, making me think it was entirely impossible (opening up a purely marriage/murder game of expansion for which Isaac the hedonist was amply prepared). Finally, 13 years into the game, and 3 years before the Chief of Yaik would be able to ally with a guaranteed troop sender (co-heathen hater), the fabrication came. A quick drafting of the supremely useful early game Bulgar mercenaries (60 monies and less than 4 a month) netted a second county and a little breathing room.

Vassals who have a liege of a different faith are unable to wage holy wars. Based on the way the CB is written up I'm sure thats the way it was designed. So that bit isn't a bug.

 

[liamgamer55]

Vassals who have a liege of a different faith are unable to wage holy wars. Based on the way the CB is written up I'm sure thats the way it was designed. So that bit isn't a bug.

I thought it's only that they're unable to wage holy wars against people of their liege's faith? So a christian count who is in a muslim realm can infact wage holy wars on pagans for instance.

Lets take a look: (all of the below must be true)
-You can't be pagan
-You can't declare a holy war on someone within the same realm
-In order for it to be valid, the target has to be one of the following, a heretic compared to your faith (catholic vs lollard and visa versa, not catholic vs orthadox though), or from a different religion group, or you're a muslim and they're a different type of muslim (the target of your attack must not be at war with non muslims)
-You can't declare holy war if your liege is not from the same religion group as you
-You can't declare holy war if your liege is the (exact) same religion as the one you're targeting
-Your liege either has to be the same religion as you, or you and your liege are both not heretics.

Any questions? P.S. My brain now hurts

Examples:

For the sake of all examples assume crown authority is set to autonomous vassals and all other non religious factors aren't present.

[EDIT!] List outdated, some of these examples are wrong, see below

-You are the tribe of lithuanians(a pagan duke), you're attemping to declare a holy war, it's not going to work
-You are an orthadox greek duke declaring a holy war on a monophysite duke in the byzantine empire(ruled by an orthadox emperor), it's going to work
-You are the fatamids (shia) trying to declare holy war on the seljuks (sunni) during their war with the byzantines, it isn't going to work.
-You are the fatamids (shia) trying to declare holy war on the seljuks after their war with the byzantines, it is going to work.
-You are a greek orthodox duke trying to declare holy war on a kurdish (sunni duke) in your new realm of the seljuk sultanate(sunni). It isn't going to work.
-You are a greek orthodox duke trying to declare holy war on a kurdish sunni duke who is not in your new realm of the seljuk sultanate. It isn't going to work.
-You are a greek orthadox duke trying to declare holy war on the fatamids (shia) while you're in your new realm of the seljuk sultanate. It is going to work. That said expect to lose the game very quickly.
-You are a greek orthadox duke trying to declare war on the mongols (pagan) while you're in your new realm of the seljuk sultnate. It is going to work.
-In the middle of this war they convert to sunni islam (the exact same as your liege), the war gets cancelled/white peaced at that moment (I think the game assumes a white peace, but I'm not sure).
-You are a greek orthadox duke trying to declare holy war on a greek bogomolist duke in your new realm of the seljuk sultanate. While it isn't the wisest move around it is going to work.
[/EDIT]


Relevent file: Crusader Kings II\Common\00_cb_types.txt

Search for "name = CB_NAME_RELIGIOUS"

Code:

name = CB_NAME_RELIGIOUS

can_use = {
ROOT = {
NOT = { religion_group = pagan_group }
NOT = { same_realm = FROM }
OR = {
NOT = { religion_group = FROM }
is_heresy_of = FROM
is_parent_religion = FROM
AND = {
religion_group = muslim
NOT = { religion = FROM }
FROM = {
NOT = {
any_current_enemy = {
NOT = {
religion_group = muslim
}
}
}
}
}
}
top_liege = {
religion_group = ROOT
NOT = { religion = FROM }
OR = {
religion = ROOT
AND = {
is_heretic = no
ROOT = { is_heretic = no }
}
}
}
}
}

 

[RedRalphWiggum]

We're not discussing the Daily Mail in this forum.

 

[Lorehead]

-You are an orthadox greek duke declaring a holy war on a monophysite duke in the byzantine empire(ruled by an orthadox emperor), it's going to work

You mean, a doux outside the Empire? Wouldn’t this still fail because Monophysites in the game are a heresy of the Miaphysite and not the Orthodox faith?

-You are a greek orthadox duke trying to declare holy war on the fatamids (shia) while you're in your new realm of the seljuk sultanate. It is going to work. That said expect to lose the game very quickly.

Wouldn't this fail because your top liege is not in your religious group? In a test game as the Count of Suenik, swearing fealty to Alp Arslan meant I could not declare holy war. Crown authority was medium.

Also, you should probably be able to white peace out if you’re losing. Your liege might or might not be in a position to revoke all of your titles, and your neighbors might or might not be in a position to invade you before you can rebuild your armies. They’d still have to go to war against the entire empire, and your own fellow vassals still can’t declare war on you.

-You are a greek orthadox duke trying to declare war on the mongols (pagan) while you're in your new realm of the seljuk sultnate. It is going to work.

Wouldn’t this fail because your top liege is not in your religious group? In my test game, I couldn’t declare holy war on the Cumans as a Christian vassal of the Seljuks.

-You are a greek orthadox duke trying to declare holy war on a greek bogomolist duke in your new realm of the seljuk sultanate. While it isn't the wisest move around it is going to work.

In my test game, this also failed even after I lowered crown authority in the Seljuk sultanate. You cannot declare holy war if your top liege is in another religious group.

A better-formatted code listing:

can_use = {
		ROOT = {
			NOT = { religion_group = pagan_group }
			NOT = { same_realm = FROM }
			OR = {
				NOT = { religion_group = FROM }
				is_heresy_of = FROM
				is_parent_religion = FROM
				AND = {
					religion_group = muslim
					NOT = { religion = FROM }
					FROM = {
						NOT = { 
							any_current_enemy = {
								NOT = {
									religion_group = muslim
								}
							}
						}
					}
				}
			}
			top_liege = {
				religion_group = ROOT
				NOT = { religion = FROM }
				OR = {
					religion = ROOT
					AND = {
						is_heretic = no
						ROOT = { is_heretic = no }
					}
				}
			}
		}
	}

	is_valid = {
		ROOT = {
			NOT = { religion_group = pagan_group }
			NOT = { same_realm = FROM }
			OR = {
				NOT = { religion_group = FROM }
				is_heresy_of = FROM
				is_parent_religion = FROM
				AND = {
					religion_group = muslim
					NOT = { religion = FROM }
				}
			}
			top_liege = {
				NOT = { religion = FROM }
			}
		}
	}

 

[liamgamer55]

You mean, a doux outside the Empire? Wouldn’t this still fail because Monophysites in the game are a heresy of the Miaphysite and not the Orthodox faith?

Possibly, this is a complex subject so that's a mistake I've made. I forgot that monophysite isn't an orthadox heresy. In that example I'll replace miaphysite with bogomolist.

Wouldn't this fail because your top liege is not in your religious group? In a test game as the Count of Suenik, swearing fealty to Alp Arslan meant I could not declare holy war. Crown authority was medium.

Correct, my examples were a lot more hastily drawn up than my code analysis.

Also, you should probably be able to white peace out if you’re losing. Your liege might or might not be in a position to revoke all of your titles, and your neighbors might or might not be in a position to invade you before you can rebuild your armies. They’d still have to go to war against the entire empire, and your own fellow vassals still can’t declare war on you.

I didn't really comment on whether white peace is or isn't a good idea. If I did I added a few jokes (not very funny ones I know) to spice up the lines and lines of boring text.

Wouldn’t this fail because your top liege is not in your religious group? In my test game, I couldn’t declare holy war on the Cumans as a Christian vassal of the Seljuks.

Yes, thankyou for your analysis, I'll remove some of the examples that don't work and hopefully people can suggest some replacement ones.

In my test game, this also failed even after I lowered crown authority in the Seljuk sultanate. You cannot declare holy war if your top liege is in another religious group.

Absolutely, I don't doubt that at all, I just forgot it while I was writing the examples. Storing that much logic in my memory just isn't possible, I probably should've proofread the list a bit more before posting it though. Here's an updated one.

[improved from above list]
-You are the tribe of lithuanians(a pagan duke), you're attemping to declare a holy war, it's not going to work
Why: You are pagan

-You are an orthadox greek duke declaring a holy war on a miaphysite(different christian religion) duke in the byzantine empire(ruled by an orthadox emperor), it's not going to work
Why: Miaphysite isn't an orthadox heresy

-You are an orthadox greek duke declaring a holy war on a bogomolist(heresy of orthadox christianity) duke in the byzantine empire(ruled by an orthadox emperor), it's going to work
Why: Among other things, bogomolist is an orthadox heresy

-You are the fatamids (shia) trying to declare holy war on the seljuks (sunni) during their war with the byzantines, it isn't going to work.
Why: Muslims can't declare war on muslims while they are fighting infidels (aka people from another religious group)

-You are the fatamids (shia) trying to declare holy war on the seljuks after their war with the byzantines, it is going to work
Why: Among other things, muslims can usually declare war on any other muslims no matter what

Just a reminder, there's only 5 amount of relationships from one religion to another

Same: It's the same religion (catholic to catholic)
Heresy of: It's a "child" religion (catholic to cathar)
Parent of: It's a parent religion (cathar to catholic)
Same group: It's a similar religion from the same religious group (catholic to orthadox)
Different group: It's a religion that isn't concidered similar enough to be in the same religion group (catholic to shia, shia to pagan, anything etc)

Generally religions view each other the same way (bilaterally instead of unilaterally) except for parent and child religions. Cathars know they are a split from catholicism (but think they are newer and better), and catholics know that catharism is a split from them (but think they are older and better).

That said, the game files are not arranged according to age of religion necassarily, in doubt take a look at
Crusader kings II\Common\Religions\00_religions.txt
Even if you're scared of text files, that file is quite easy to read. Feel free to ask in this thread any religion's relationship to another religion and I'll check in the files the correct answer (and naturally if I'm wrong someone else will point it out fortunately).

 

[Lorehead]

I think there are still a few fine points that aren’t right, primarily that you can’t declare holy war inside the same realm. Here’s a better set of examples as I understand them.

For the sake of this example, let’s say that you start out as the independent Count of Suenik. You are a Miaphysite Christian. You can declare holy war on:

• A non-Christian
• A Monophysite (considered a “heresy” of the Miaphysite faith in your game).

You cannot declare holy war on:

• Any character without land
• Any vassal; you must declare war on their liege instead
• Another Miaphysite
• Someone from a different branch of Christianity, such as Orthodox Christianity or its Bogomilist offshoot.

So, you could immediately declare a holy war for Azerbaijan on Alp Arslan (but not directly on the Beylerbey of Azerbaijan, a vassal). You’d be very unlikely to succeed, but you could do it. You could even declare holy war on him for land that belongs to a vassal of your own religion.

Let’s say that, instead, you decide to side with the winner and swear fealty to Alp Arslan. Once you do this, you can no longer declare holy war on anyone, since he is not part of your religious group (Christian).

Finally, let’s say that you swear fealty to the Emperor of Byzantium, an Orthodox Christian, and then lower crown authority so that you can declare war on his other vassals. That adds a few more restrictions. You still cannot declare holy war inside your own realm. You also can’t declare a holy war against your own top liege’s religion; so, if you were a Sunni vassal of the Shia Caliph, you could declare a holy war against anyone but a Sunni or a Shiite.

There’s one other wrinkle that probably should be considered a bug: you cannot declare holy war if your top liege belongs to a different sect, and either of you is a “heretic.” Thus, if you were a Catholic who pledged fealty to a Maronite or a Nestorian, you would lose the ability to declare holy wars, because the game considers those “heresies,” even though your liege obviously would not think of himself as a heretic, and the Catholic Church was in communion with both by the end of the period. If your liege were Orthodox, and thus in schism with your church, you could. This is obviously silly. It’s most likely to come up in actual gameplay after an Orthodox ruler mends the Great Schism, which demotes Catholicism to a heresy.

Finally, excommunication is completely different and unrelated to the holy war casus belli.

 

[Veldmaarschalk]

The last few posts are not really on topic, so please return to the subject of this thread.