Wrong anatolia.

[Encak]

The problem here is that Greek culture became a part of Turkish culture, and that makes it difficult to represent both. It easier to tell them apart by religion and language. If your Grandfather was a Greek speaking Orthodox Christian he would be considered Greek, but if you (the grandson) became a Turkish speaking Sunni Muslim you would be considered a Turk over being Greek. So if the people of Anatolia where sufficiently Greek speaking and Christian then they need to be represented Greek/Armenian and the areas predominately Muslim and Turkish speaking need to represented as Turkish.

 

[unmerged(375695)]

The problem here is that Greek culture became a part of Turkish culture, and that makes it difficult to represent both. It easier to tell them apart by religion and language. If your Grandfather was a Greek speaking Orthodox Christian he would be considered Greek, but if you (the grandson) became a Turkish speaking Sunni Muslim you would be considered a Turk over being Greek. So if the people of Anatolia where sufficiently Greek speaking and Christian then they need to be represented Greek/Armenian and the areas predominately Muslim and Turkish speaking need to represented as Turkish.

Maybe you are right regrading the greeks.

But what is about the armenians?

 

[Garak]

I think you guys are overthinking this. The reason for the Greek/Turkish provinces in western Anatolia, at least, is probably a balance issue, plain and simple. The Ottomans need an ahistorical amount of homogenity to function properly with the game mechanics. That's all there is to it.

 

[Outrider]

Five lines of rubish.

I posted several maps and sources and even a Byzantinist (We dont know if he actually is) agreed with me in some Points.

I posted several maps and sources and even a Byzantinist (We dont know if he actually is) agreed with me in some Points.[/QUOTE]

1) Your sources are from the 20th century and are irrelevant, as has been pointed out extensively by several posters.
2) Your 1st map (greek language) shows where different pre-modern greek dialects were spoken. It in no way asserts that greek was the primary language/culture in the Mid-15th century. The 2nd map (Armenia) is of the 17th century, again not de-facto evidence of mid-15th century. Neither the map nor the text define what the being show - ethnicity, language usage, cultural identity. While thankfully the map is linked to something outside of Wikipedia, it appears that it was compiled by the Armenian government. I'd defer to someone more knowledgeable than I am to determine if its unbiased.
3) The byzantinist in fact disagreed with every single point you made in favor of extending Greek culture/orthodoxy and provided references for his disagreement. He only "mostly" agreed that an argument could be made for the extension of Armenia.

 

[Outrider]

I think you guys are overthinking this. The reason for the Greek/Turkish provinces in western Anatolia, at least, is probably a balance issue, plain and simple. The Ottomans need an ahistorical amount of homogenity to function properly with the game mechanics. That's all there is to it.

That is kinda the point. A Greek nationalist (Hello Nikolaos from Macedonia) is advocating messing up game balance in the favor of "historical accuracy" when his suggested alterations aren't factually supported. Its a double-whammy of annoying. If you want to play the game in a way that a-historically promotes your country, the game is easily mod-able.

 

[Encak]

I think you guys are overthinking this. The reason for the Greek/Turkish provinces in western Anatolia, at least, is probably a balance issue, plain and simple. The Ottomans need an ahistorical amount of homogenity to function properly with the game mechanics. That's all there is to it.

No need to be a party pooper here, this is kinda interesting.

Edit: Eh, the only game that is going to be able to represent any of this crap properly is Victoria 2. In this game it doesn't matter all that much since the large amount of Turkish provinces makes it easy to get accepted. Although there probably needs to be more Armenians, one province is pitiful, and kind of a joke. Hell the entire Byzantine Group is a joke.

 

[heraklonas]

Five lines of rubish.

I posted several maps and sources and even a Byzantinist (We dont know if he actually is) agreed with me in some Points.

Lol okay, I'm just a ph.d candidate but nevertheless this topic got my attention of course.
I'm also reluctant to overdo here, because it's a game and balance issues are more important than fabulous accuracy. But if somebody stresses accuracy for 15th cent., I'm he one who warns because our data is not precise at all.

The biggest problem is the one of definition. What makes somebody a Greek in that period? first: his own consciousness? There was no Greek, but rather a complex Roman identity as far as we can reconstruct on the basis of the intelligentsia. Second: his language? Greek lost favor very soon, already in the 16th-17th (for those Byzantines who stayed and those were a minority in Asia minor of course). That was so thorough that in the 19th cent. they had to be taught from the very basics by Greeks from the mainland. Third, religion? This was kept longest and in some parts till the 1920s. The British decided that every Orthodox is a Greek although those were not able to understand Greek anymore at that point.
Furthermore, in many areas there was obviously no majority, but three or even four even minorities. Its just painful to decide who is the one who has the demographic rights on those EU-fantasy provinces.

That being said, for vanilla Erzerum should rather being Armenian; Adana as well. Edirne Greek. But Izmir province is not Symrna alone. Smyrna was overwhelmingly Greek in the 14th century (and the island like Chios even 99%), but the province not. In the countryside there were not many Byzantines left. We know the situation there quite well because of the crusade of 1344 and the Catalan company in round 1309, and due to the affair of Matthew of Ephesos (we have sources, so to say).
In the case of Kastamonu/Sinop I just can say very surely that there was pretty no Greek-speaking population left in the interior in the 1400s. Only at the coast there were some in Inebolu, Sinop, Amasra of course, but these "cities" were little, not even 10k inhabitants. Kastamonu was superior and had almost no Greeks (ca. 1% under Süleyman I where we have the first tax register), and just some more Armenians.

I just can recommend meiou, where the situation is represented pretty good. There is also taken into account that there was a difference between the more nomadic and later Turkmenic intruders (after 1240) 'yürük' and the more civilized and settled Turks 'tadji' who also lived in cities. There was much conflict between them before the Ottomans took control in around 1430-50.

 

[unmerged(375695)]

1) Your sources are from the 20th century and are irrelevant, as has been pointed out extensively by several posters.

Rubish. Not all my sources are from the 20th century.

2) Your 1st map (greek language) shows where different pre-modern greek dialects were spoken. It in no way asserts that greek was the primary language/culture in the Mid-15th century.

Okay, but i already said that i accepted the turkish culture now in asia minor regrading the greeks. Please leave it as it is now.

The 2nd map (Armenia) is of the 17th century, again not de-facto evidence of mid-15th century.

Rubbish. Do you think that the armenian christian population of the ottoman empire outnumbered the muslims after two centuries?

Neither the map nor the text define what the being show - ethnicity, language usage, cultural identity.

Rubish again, there was a link including where you can be in mind with the information.

While thankfully the map is linked to something outside of Wikipedia, it appears that it was compiled by the Armenian government. I'd defer to someone more knowledgeable than I am to determine if its unbiased.

Instead of doubting sources you could post some by your own.

He only "mostly" agreed that an argument could be made for the extension of Armenia.

Could that not be a clue to start a fair discussion? I even said, that i accepted it regrading the greeks. When will you understand it?

I think you guys are overthinking this. The reason for the Greek/Turkish provinces in western Anatolia, at least, is probably a balance issue, plain and simple. The Ottomans need an ahistorical amount of homogenity to function properly with the game mechanics. That's all there is to it.

I do not agree with that. The ottomans are yet overpowered. But maybe you are right, because some greek provinces in anatolia maybe would weaken up the ottomans.

That is kinda the point. A Greek nationalist (Hello Nikolaos from Macedonia) is advocating messing up game balance in the favor of "historical accuracy" when his suggested alterations aren't factually supported.

1. Refrain from theories of my ethos, please.

No need to be a party pooper here, this is kinda interesting.

I think that too. Why don't discussing about that instead of bury the issue.

Although there probably needs to be more Armenians, one province is pitiful, and kind of a joke. Hell the entire Byzantine Group is a joke.

I think that too. Regrading game balance: It would increase game balance i think. Contemporary its like the armenians don't even exist.

_

_

_

I remember:

I accepted it regrading the greeks. I ask people who still give themself airs and branding me as nationalist, post some sources by your own instead of doubt mine and synthesis up without a single link or source.

Well do you agree to change one or two provinces to armenian?

And do you think that the re-arriveing of the byzantines in anatolia should be pushed a little bit with missions, decisions or something?

Our "byzantinist" agreed for erzerum and adana.

 

[Thracian]

anatolia is a melting pot for the cultures. there is no simple way to distinguish them.
religion could be a way to do it, but it is represented by religion itself

 

[metallicania]

When Turks came to Anatolia they took Greek and Armenian culture while Greeks and Armenians in Anatolia also affected by Turkish culture. In fact many Turks in western half of Turkey is ethnically Greek and Bulgarian, this is almost half of the Turkish population in Turkey. The problem is, "culture" in game isn't defined by ethnics but the share of culture. In fact Turks aren't even considered muslim by some authorities because they drink alcohol (rakı is considered as national drink of Turkey, it is very smiliar with Greek ouzo) celebration of christmas (Noel in Turkish) and Turkish women not wearing hijab (well, that is the main reason I guess). "Turkish" culture in game souldnt be considered as Nomadic Asian or Arab culture but a mixture of all of the Anatolian cultures.

I don't think any province should be changed culture but I'm not against adding more province in Eastern Turkey and making them Armenian (e.g. Kars province)

 

[unmerged(375695)]

When Turks came to Anatolia they took Greek and Armenian culture while Greeks and Armenians in Anatolia also affected by Turkish culture. In fact many Turks in western half of Turkey is ethnically Greek and Bulgarian, this is almost half of the Turkish population in Turkey. The problem is, "culture" in game isn't defined by ethnics but the share of culture. In fact Turks aren't even considered muslim by some authorities because they drink alcohol (rakı is considered as national drink of Turkey, it is very smiliar with Greek ouzo) celebration of christmas (Noel in Turkish) and Turkish women not wearing hijab (well, that is the main reason I guess). "Turkish" culture in game souldnt be considered as Nomadic Asian or Arab culture but a mixture of all of the Anatolian cultures.

I absolutely agree with you. The anatolian turkish culture is a mix of persian, arabian, armenian and greek culture that was affected a little
bit by the turkish steppe culture. We could propably say, that anatolia turkish is an own culture.
If you regrad the ethnic aspect you will see that most turks of northern and western turkey are greeks. You are right.

I don't think any province should be changed culture but I'm not against adding more province in Eastern Turkey and making them Armenian (e.g. Kars province)

That's what i am talking about. I totally agree with you.

 

[Juggernaught]

No, I think they either fled the country or assimilated into the Turkish population. It would be great if EUIV's representation of population was more nuanced to also include those Greek Muslims, but it would be wrong to make any province in Western Anatolia Greek given the current system. Besides, ethnic identity wasn't terribly important in this era anyway. People who converted to Islam were considered part of the same group no matter what language they spoke. To the Muslims they were all part of the Islamic community, and to outsiders they were all 'Turks'. And huge numbers of modern Turks are indeed the descendants of these Greeks and other people who became Muslim in Ottoman times.

Pretty much this. People tend to compare ingame cultural representation of provinces with modern terms. There was not a consciousness of nationalism within the empire. Ottomans in the eras of rise and fall were not even ruled by Turkish rulers.
Also, Turkey is a unification which consists of all kinds of people from different ethnicities(Tartars, Greeks, Arabs, Georgians, Kurds, <insert>).

 

[metallicania]

I absolutely agree with you. The anatolian turkish culture is a mix of persian, arabian, armenian and greek culture that was affected a little
bit by the turkish steppe culture. We could propably say, that anatolia turkish is an own culture.
If you regrad the ethnic aspect you will see that most turks of northern and western turkey are greeks. You are right.

Imho Turkish culture should be divided in two. Eastern Turkey is Turkish and Western Turkey and Balkans "Balkan Turks". Tuskish stays the same in Turko-Semitic group and Balkan Turks would be in Byzantine group. By that way game can represent westernisation efforts and conflict between innovative and traditional Turks. Monarches choose sides between Balkan Turks and Eastern Turks and with flover event/decisions that would be really nice mini-game for Ottomans . And it would represent Greek presence/influence on Turkish culture.

 

[Dogukan91]

A better thing to do could be to change Smyrna into Greek and some Eastern Provinces to Armenian but make them a defaultly "accepted" culture because that was, to a large extend the case. Ottoman Empire was an empire after all with a centralized bureucratic system and regulations for all subjects.Greeks, Armenians and later Jews represented the Ottoman identity for a very long-time until 19th century. It was in a way, a united-front of these cultures under Ottoman banner which was not even necessarily "Turkish" to begin with.

 

[grand_Turk]

When Turks came to Anatolia they took Greek and Armenian culture while Greeks and Armenians in Anatolia also affected by Turkish culture. In fact many Turks in western half of Turkey is ethnically Greek and Bulgarian, this is almost half of the Turkish population in Turkey.

You're exaggerating too much, which makes your statement no different than those of the nationalists of ethnic minorities in Turkey who claim that there are 50 million Kurds in Turkey, or 40 million Zaza People etc. :rofl:

The problem is, "culture" in game isn't defined by ethnics but the share of culture. In fact Turks aren't even considered muslim by some authorities because they drink alcohol (rakı is considered as national drink of Turkey, it is very smiliar with Greek ouzo) celebration of christmas (Noel in Turkish) and Turkish women not wearing hijab (well, that is the main reason I guess). "Turkish" culture in game souldnt be considered as Nomadic Asian or Arab culture but a mixture of all of the Anatolian cultures.

LOL Who are these authorities? Drinking alcohol makes muslim Turks sinner at worst but not infidel at all. Furthermore, only sots consider that rakı is the national drink of Turkey. If there is to be a national beverage, it's definitely ayran which has been in use since the nomadic Turkish empires of the Middle Asia. We know that there's definitely a distinction between Turkish culture and Arabic one but the examples you gave such as celebration of christmas are just there to prove that how the cultural imperialism became effective on the majority of Turkish people. Truth be told, I am not able to understand why some users put too much effort in order to prove that Turks had been hellenised to the point where they neither carry Turkish blood nor they show the sign of being Muslims. I can understand Greek nationalist to some extend but others? It just gets overwhelmingly annoying.
Talking about the game, I see no problem in cultural division of nations on the map. I also don't understand how "wrong anatolia" helps the game,which is already in balance, become balanced.

A better thing to do could be to change Smyrna into Greek and some Eastern Provinces to Armenian but make them a defaultly "accepted" culture because that was, to a large extend the case. Ottoman Empire was an empire after all with a centralized bureucratic system and regulations for all subjects.Greeks, Armenians and later Jews represented the Ottoman identity for a very long-time until 19th century. It was in a way, a united-front of these cultures under Ottoman banner which was not even necessarily "Turkish" to begin with.

That makes sense.

 

[metallicania]

You're exaggerating too much, which makes your statement no different than those of the nationalists of ethnic minorities in Turkey who claim that there are 50 million Kurds in Turkey, or 40 million Zaza People etc. :rofl:


LOL Who are these authorities? Drinking alcohol makes muslim Turks sinner at worst but not infidel at all. Furthermore, only sots consider that rakı is the national drink of Turkey. If there is to be a national beverage, it's definitely ayran which has been in use since the nomadic Turkish empires of the Middle Asia. We know that there's definitely a distinction between Turkish culture and Arabic one but the examples you gave such as celebration of christmas are just there to prove that how the cultural imperialism became effective on the majority of Turkish people. Truth be told, I am not able to understand why some users put too much effort in order to prove that Turks had been hellenised to the point where they neither carry Turkish blood nor they show the sign of being Muslims. I can understand Greek nationalist to some extend but others? It just gets overwhelmingly annoying.
Talking about the game, I see no problem in cultural division of nations on the map. I also don't understand how "wrong anatolia" helps the game,which is already in balance, become balanced.

I live in Istanbul and I have seen many parts of Turkey. And western Turkish people(Marmara,Aegea, Mediterranean and parts of Black Sea regions) happen to be whiter than eastern regions and clearly in History of Ottoman Empire, Arabs never trusted Ottomans and they wanted an Arabian Caliphate since they saw Turks infidel. I don't want this topic to be a personal discussion so I'll keep it short answering your misleading words. Plus, you have no right to agressively call people "sinner" who drink alcohol. Second, "drink" is ment to be liquid alcohol mix with flovers and "ayran" isn't an alcoholic drink. Turkish Empires in Asia had "kımız" as a type of Turkic alcoholic drink since ayran is non-alcoholic. Not every Turk is as religious as you generalise, In fact all of the Turkic countries today is secular, which extremly rare in other muslim majority states, so don't make a statement that include whole of a nation.

Subject is clearly to discuss province cultures of game, so please keep your conservative ideas to yourself.

My final opion about this subject, game doesn't have a cultural minority mechanic. It makes cultural side of the game so superficial, we may see an expansion in later times I guess. Or at least a mod like Dei Gratia.

 

[unmerged(248351)]

And western Turkish people(Marmara,Aegea, Mediterranean and parts of Black Sea regions) happen to be whiter than eastern regions

Guys can we at least agree that medieval cultural groups, as abstracted in this game, cannot be defined by 19th century national, let alone racial, terms? If inhabitants of Western Turkey seem whiter than those of eastern Turkey, it can be because of the "Greek blood" running through their veins (even though Turks in Istanbul are,empirically speaking, much fairer than the average Greek), or simply because their ancestors migrated from Bosnia, Bulgaria, Macedonia and the Caucasus in the last 150 years. So let's leave 'race' and 'blood' out of this OK? Since they are totally random and define nothing but nationalists' dreams?

The changes you're entertaining make little historical sense - making Izmir Greek would make as much sense as making Giannena or Thessaly Albanian or Serb (Nikolaos's map shows no Greek spoken in central Greece). They also make little gameplay sense, since by the time a player controlled Byzantium gets Izmir, you probably can survive the possible rebellions until you convert them. I am no expert on medieval Armenia, but I feel the omission of Kurds is a much larger problem in terms of accuracy. But what would that add to the game?

 

[DanubianCossak]

But what would that add to the game?

Accuracy...

 

[Encak]

Ok, I liked this question because it was surprising complex and unfortunately current game mechanics will not allow for a complex answer such as adding a minority culture (would be fantastic to revert those annoying AI culture conversions) but now i'm seeing people get a little too heated into this.
Grand_Turk: You need to calm down and keep your nationalism to yourself, the game is not balanced and if we are playing a game that tries to give us a historical scenario to start from, I would like to see it portrayed as accurately as possible. We have all pretty much agreed here that Anatolia is a melting pot of cultures but our point of contention is that we are unsure of how "Turkish" Anatolia was at the 1444 start considering how long it had been Hellenized. I'm down for adding 1-maybe 2 more Greek provinces with probably Sunni religion in Anatolia and adding 2-3 more Armenian provinces of Orthodox religion as that seems to be the only way to get a slightly more accurate Anatolia than what we have now. Please try to not be as condescending when you reply man, we are just trying to have a discussion not an argument.

 

[pac]

Thanks for all the comments in this thread. I know they were intended for Paradox … but I've adjusted the Anatolian cultures in the mod, MNS: Rinascimento! (see link in sig), based on them anyway. =)

Changes include more Armenian provinces, and the introduction of Kurdish.

I would *like* to be able to add Greek culture to at least one province in Western Anatolia (eg, Izmir/Smyrna). However, I think at the moment that would require an extra province to be added in the area, as Izmir province extends *way* beyond the coastal and urban areas.

Enjoy the arguments!