Wrong anatolia.

[grand_Turk]

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

You don't have to travel all across Turkey to have a clue on the ethnicities of people living in Turkey. Simply classfying people according to their colour is too inadequete to be a scientific fact or observation about the nationalities of people of Turkey as well. You can get a sunburn to turn into black, or vice versa. :rofl: And those of you still claiming that the aegean parts of Turkey is still Greek. As far as I know Mustafa Kemal Ataturk drove the Greeks into the aegean sea at the end of the Turkish independence war. In case you're right, those running greeks must have hidden somewhere in the aegean region and started to introduce themselves as Turks supporting the Turkish revolution to evade the wrath of Turks.

and clearly in History of Ottoman Empire, Arabs never trusted Ottomans and they wanted an Arabian Caliphate since they saw Turks infidel.

Absolute distortion. The tobmstones of Arabs from Yemen, Egypt, Palestine, Syria, and many other countries, which were once ruled by the Ottomans, in Canakkale martyrs' memorial are enough to prove that you're misleading people. Your expressions, in fact, are the same as those of extreme Turkish nationalists. Thus,your above statement doesn't reflect any historical fact. For the record, Arabs under the Ottoman rule, had a peaceful time until the foreign occupations started in the beginning of twentieth century. As we all know and you ignore, British secret service managed to prompt a large revolt among the Arab subjects of the Ottoman Empire during WW1. After the collapse of this huge state, the flags of the newly founded small Arabian States were designed by British and French to be symbol of Arabian revolt against the Ottoman State. (Notice that their flags are very similar and have the same colours.) Besides, the map of the Middle East was drawn with meterstick by victors and they installed puppet leaders who would work for them as well. Consequently, this hatred of yours towards Arabs, and that of some Arabian nationalist against Turks were planted by the same powers so that they could make good use of a divided Middle East.
Don't get me wrong, I have no quarrel with Biritish people and my aim is definitely not to spread enmity among people. Unlike this guy, I also hate racism.

I don't want this topic to be a personal discussion so I'll keep it short answering your misleading words.

So you should've tried hard. As I showed above, you're the one who is misleading people about the facts.

Plus, you have no right to agressively call people "sinner" who drink alcohol.

Well, I didn't feel any aggressiveness inside while writing this but you're the one claiming that I was being aggressive, saying they're sinners. To make it clear, if a muslim drinks alcohol, it simply makes that muslim sinner according to Islam, period. We have no dispute here. If the drank guy is not a muslim, so no problem. It doesn't make difference whether he drinks. Thus, don't bother to portray me as an aggressive debater.

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.

Yeah, that's why I use "beverage" instead of "drink". Furthermore, ayran became a common beverage amongst the Turks after they converted to Islam. Considering it was a long time ago and the fact that ayran is the most consumed beverage among the traditional Turkish drinks, I see no harm calling ayran the nationalbeverage of Turks.

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.

Do tell me why my generalization was wrong. Did I miss something? Or does the fact that 97% of Turkey population is muslim disturb you? So how is that an obstacle for a secular country to have a muslim majority? Besides, you are the one struggling to portray a Turkey in which the non-muslim Turks or non-Turkish people are in majority.

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

Oh yeah zealot vs. enlightened story. Bah.

That was actually my point. I don't see how this topic will help the development of culture mechanics in the game. There's even a man claiming that the Ottoman Sultans weren't Turkish. :wacko:
How do people expect a healthy discussion in the presence of such trollling comments?

 

[spyroware1]

even though Turks in Istanbul are,empirically speaking, much fairer than the average Greek

Based on Turkish soap operas? Sorry I had to XDD

Anyway certainly the administrative elite of the Byzantine Empire wasn't Greek, and the Ottoman Empire's wasn't Turkish. Hellenism was an idea only a few toyed with and the term 'Turk' was offensive in Turkish before the 19th century. Sometimes I feel it would be a better representation to have the whole of Anatolia with an 'Anatolian' culture, with the OE having 'Ottoman' as primary culture and BYZ 'Romian' or something tacky like that.

The problem is that, realistically speaking, if Byzantium ever regained Anatolia, the coastal provinces would naturally revert to Greek culture and Christianity without huuuge efforts. Just some expulsions, slaughters, forced conversions, settlement policies and the resettlement of christian refugees coming from the plateau. Ez. Right now, in game terms, conquering Anatolia, even though it should be the first priority of a successful Byzantium, is just too bothersome. You can't convert the rich Anatolian provinces to Christianity without the final NI, which happens kinda late, and it's unwise to spend thousands of dip points in culture conversions. Yet obviously you cant have a Turkish Anatolia as Byzantium, it's an eyesore. So you expand and become stronger in Europe and leave most of Anatolia for later in a campaign. But when you're already strong, fully conquering/integrating Anatolia feels meh. That's why an Anatolian culture in the Byzantine group would be easier on the palate.

Anyway in my personal mod upon converting Anatolian provinces they flip to Greek culture. I don't see a place for Christian Turks in Byzantium or Muslim Greeks in the Ottoman Empire. Same people, different angle.

 

[Pilot00]

It seems to me that these are just ideas of a greek nationalist who wants to see that parts of Anatolia be Greek or Armenian even if it's in the game. Based on the regarding statements so far, we have no reason to think that he has a point about these matters either...

And your rebuttal is not a nationalistic one eh?

Furthermore the historical knowledge in this thread as always on the internet is evidently lacking from both sides.

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:

Actually that post shows that you are the nationalist you are trying to rebuff and you have no idea of what you are talking about.

You don't have to travel all across Turkey to have a clue on the ethnicities of people living in Turkey. Simply classfying people according to their colour is too inadequete to be a scientific fact or observation about the nationalities of people of Turkey as well. You can get a sunburn to turn into black, or vice versa. :rofl: And those of you still claiming that the aegean parts of Turkey is still Greek. As far as I know Mustafa Kemal Ataturk drove the Greeks into the aegean sea at the end of the Turkish independence war. In case you're right, those running greeks must have hidden somewhere in the aegean region and started to introduce themselves as Turks supporting the Turkish revolution to evade the wrath of Turks.

Have you heard of the presecutions that lasted till the 70's even in Istanbul? Ofc not to you its all lies.

That was actually my point. I don't see how this topic will help the development of culture mechanics in the game. There's even a man claiming that the Ottoman Sultans weren't Turkish. :wacko:
How do people expect a healthy discussion in the presence of such trollling comments?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_Muslims

Here you are

Based on Turkish soap operas? Sorry I had to XDD

Anyway certainly the administrative elite of the Byzantine Empire wasn't Greek,

Broad generalization if I may say so. It depends on the time period you discuss about.

Sometimes I feel it would be a better representation to have the whole of Anatolia with an 'Anatolian' culture, with the OE having 'Ottoman' as primary culture and BYZ 'Romian' or something tacky like that.

Another broad generalization, the melting pot happened centuries after the EUs time frame.

Anyway in my personal mod upon converting Anatolian provinces they flip to Greek culture. I don't see a place for Christian Turks in Byzantium or Muslim Greeks in the Ottoman Empire. Same people, different angle.

Assuming we are playing on the Purple phoenix theme, and restoration of the Roman empire, ethnicity was a general concern to them. Religion was. By the time yes, the ruling class would be Greek and Greek culture would be favored but in its entire infancy the RE was a multinational empire, glued by a common faith rather than national or cultural identity.

So if we assume forced conversion (which didn't happen even in older times when parts of Anatolia were regained, albeit temporarily) a Christian Turk would be as good as Christian Greek.

 

[unmerged(375695)]

Well, i say it again that i want to come to a common result with you to post an issue into the bug thread.

1. The armenian element should be underlined in the game.

Means more balance, because it is like the armenians dont even exist in the game.
Means more historical accuracy, because even centuries after the ottoman conquest armenians were a majority in many provinces. (Watch my map)

Offer: Turn some of this provinces into armenian --> Adana (Little armenia), Erzerum (Western Armen)

2. Greek element in Asia minor has to be underlined.

Means more balance, because byzantine empire will have it easier to come back to anatolia
Means more historical accuracy, because the western aegean turks are more assimilated and islamized greeks than ethnic turks.

Offer: Add desicions to convert Smyrna, Hüdavendigar and Izmit into greek after getting conquered by the byzantines. (The ottomans has a similiar desicion for constantinople)

What do you think? Is that a good compromise? Will it increase historical accuracy and balance?
Do you have some ideas?

PS: People who talked about albanian majorities in Thessaly or Epirus are talking rubish and have no idea.

 

[Juggernaught]

Well, i say it again that i want to come to a common result with you to post an issue into the bug thread.

1. The armenian element should be underlined in the game.

Means more balance, because it is like the armenians dont even exist in the game.
Means more historical accuracy, because even centuries after the ottoman conquest armenians were a majority in many provinces. (Watch my map)

Offer: Turn some of this provinces into armenian --> Adana (Little armenia), Erzerum (Western Armen)

2. Greek element in Asia minor has to be underlined.

Means more balance, because byzantine empire will have it easier to come back to anatolia
Means more historical accuracy, because the western aegean turks are more assimilated and islamized greeks than ethnic turks.

Offer: Add desicions to convert Smyrna, Hüdavendigar and Izmit into greek after getting conquered by the byzantines. (The ottomans has a similiar desicion for constantinople)

What do you think? Is that a good compromise? Will it increase historical accuracy and balance?
Do you have some ideas?

PS: People who talked about albanian majorities in Thessaly or Epirus are talking rubish and have no idea.

There is no historical accuracy with the arguments you present. Armenians are represented just fine; they have their own cultural tag and nation.
Byzantines hated Armenians for centuries even before the Ottomans settled in, thus never allowing them inside their borders. They were conscripted by nomadic tribes versus RE(Byzantines). There was not much of a presence of Armenians in central and western Anatolia for decades until the Ottomans conquered Istanbul and brought Armenians with them for various reasons.

I could agree with a decision that allows Byzantines(or any other greek) to culture and religion convert Istanbul if they reconquer Istanbul within a decade after they lost it. Anything more would be illogical.

 

[Pilot00]

There is no historical accuracy with the arguments you present. Armenians are represented just fine; they have their own cultural tag and nation.
Byzantines hated Armenians for centuries even before the Ottomans settled in, thus never allowing them inside their borders. They were conscripted by nomadic tribes versus RE(Byzantines). There was not much of a presence of Armenians in central and western Anatolia for decades until the Ottomans conquered Istanbul and brought Armenians with them for various reasons.

I could agree with a decision that allows Byzantines(or any other greek) to culture and religion convert Istanbul if they reconquer Istanbul within a decade after they lost it. Anything more would be illogical.

My eyes are bleeding regarding Armenians. I wont even take the time to post a thesis regarding Byzantine-Armenian relations, the only thing I will say that Armenia was a client state of the RE even before the Diocletian division and that there have been Armenian dynastic emperors. You need to dust of your knowledge, or more precisely to stop cherry picking.

Illogical? How so? One can also eliminate and resettle cities just as it happened in the first time. Why would be only inside ten years that sounds logical to you? Needles to say that the city was renamed Istanbul in the 1930 which is an inaccuracy of the game all things considered.

Also Turkic peoples were hired by the Byzantines and the Byzantines had allied relations under Justinian with the Turkic tribes beyond the black sea. They also used Turkic mercenaries in various wars before the rise of the Seljuk's. Does that mean that in 1444 the Byzies and the Ottomans were BFFs?

The Byzantines should only get cores on the coasts of Anatolia. The population of the time despite having a substantial Greek element was divided and the Turkish element was culturally dominant, also whoever were left Christians were not exactly advertising it either.

EDIT: Pro tip for both sides of the argument: Instead of searching for wikipedia articles and whatever half remembered things you were told of your school propaganda for your great nations, you should go reread that afore mentioned propaganda, read some books of the other sides propaganda, then a book from a writer that has nothing to gain or lose from the enlargement, compare, contrast and then reach a conclusion, instead of posting without knowing your own histories and embarrassing your respective countries and peoples.

EDIT2: Sorry for the tone, but each time I read people posting 'facts' without having the slightest idea of what they talk about and just read it in an elementary school book or wikipedia makes me furious because I feel like my profession is been mocked.

 

[unmerged(375695)]

There is no historical accuracy with the arguments you present.

Rubbish.

1. My asources are state based not from blogs or forums.

2. You didnt presented us any source or argument.

Armenians are represented just fine; they have their own cultural tag and nation.

Rubbish.

1. Armenians were until the genocide very presentative in eastern anatolia.

2. Still in 17th century a majority in many provinces. (Watch my map)

Byzantines hated Armenians for centuries even before the Ottomans settled in, thus never allowing them inside their borders.

Hahahahahaha. Rubish. Extreme Rubish. Watch armenian history and historical settlement territories.

There was not much of a presence of Armenians in central and western Anatolia for decades until the Ottomans conquered Istanbul and brought Armenians with them for various reasons.

Hahahahahaha. OMG. Stop please.

I could agree with a decision that allows Byzantines(or any other greek) to culture and religion convert Istanbul if they reconquer Istanbul within a decade after they lost it. Anything more would be illogical.

hahahaha. chauvinist you are. God. UNbeleaveable.

 

[Pilot00]

Rubbish.

1. My asources are state based not from blogs or forums.

2. You didnt presented us any source or argument.



Rubbish.

1. Armenians were until the genocide very presentative in eastern anatolia.

2. Still in 17th century a majority in many provinces. (Watch my map)



Hahahahahaha. Rubish. Extreme Rubish. Watch armenian history and historical settlement territories.



Hahahahahaha. OMG. Stop please.



hahahaha. chauvinist you are. God. UNbeleaveable.

You are not helping your case with that kind of juvenile responses either.

 

[AndreasPhokas]

All I know is that the coastal regions had sizeable greek populations especially in pontus. There boom. My ground breaking information. And a lot of greeks lived in turkey until the Greco-turk war thingie that happened after WW1.

boom yep. I am ready for my PHD in history now.

 

[unmerged(375695)]

You are not helping your case with that kind of juvenile responses either.

Yea, i think you are right, but i am tired of refuting every assertion of everyone.

Well i will do that now.

 

[unmerged(375695)]

There is no historical accuracy with the arguments you present.

I posted a map based on national research. You posted nothing.

Armenians are represented just fine;

I dont think so.

they have their own cultural tag and nation.

Wich is way to small in compare to the historical reality.

Byzantines hated Armenians for centuries even before the Ottomans settled in, thus never allowing them inside their borders.There was not much of a presence of Armenians in central and western Anatolia for decades until the Ottomans conquered Istanbul and brought Armenians with them for various reasons.

No, the armenians were also before the ottomans a majority in the lanscape of anatolia.

Maybe you know the armenian state of cilikia wich stands until 1375?

Ancient ages

Source: http://www.google.de/imgres?imgurl=...ur=240&page=1&start=0&ndsp=32&ved=0CGcQrQMwBQ

Please don't make me laugh.

I could agree with a decision that allows Byzantines(or any other greek) to culture and religion convert Istanbul if they reconquer Istanbul within a decade after they lost it. Anything more would be illogical.

No, you know very well the greek presence in asia minor. You are just a chauvinist. Sorry to say that, but what you say is hypocritical.

 

[unmerged(375695)]

In the 15th century, Cilicia fell under Ottoman dominion and officially became known as the Adana Vilayet. Cilicia was one of the most important regions for the Ottoman Armenians because it managed very well to preserve Armenian character throughout the years. In fact, the Cilician highlands were densely populated by Armenian peasants

In ports and cities of the Adana plain, commerce and industry were almost entirely in the hands of the Armenians and it remained so thanks to a constant influx of Armenians from the highlands. Their population was continuously increasing

Source: http://www.google.de/imgres?imgurl=...ur=240&page=1&start=0&ndsp=32&ved=0CGcQrQMwBQ

An other reason to change Adana into armenian.

 

[Shumpitostick]

In the 15th century, Cilicia fell under Ottoman dominion and officially became known as the Adana Vilayet. Cilicia was one of the most important regions for the Ottoman Armenians because it managed very well to preserve Armenian character throughout the years. In fact, the Cilician highlands were densely populated by Armenian peasants

In ports and cities of the Adana plain, commerce and industry were almost entirely in the hands of the Armenians and it remained so thanks to a constant influx of Armenians from the highlands. Their population was continuously increasing

Source: http://www.google.de/imgres?imgurl=...ur=240&page=1&start=0&ndsp=32&ved=0CGcQrQMwBQ

An other reason to change Adana into armenian.

I checked your sources and it says most Cilician Armenian noble fled the country, although the peasantry remained. This leads to the question what should culture represent. This is a much better source: (although it's from 1896)

 

[unmerged(375695)]

This is a much better source: (although it's from 1896)

Why is this better than my sources from the 15th century and 17th century?

 

[unmerged(375695)]

Anyway certainly the administrative elite of the Byzantine Empire wasn't Greek

Please. Just please.

 

[Thund91]

I agree that Anatolia could use some more diversity in the culture of its provinces.

 

[Outrider]

You are not helping your case with that kind of juvenile responses either.

I think he believes that it does, since all his responses to criticism are "rubbish" and "I presented evidence". Its like he doesn't read the rest of everyone's posts where they have told him that the sources he has thus-far presented are either unreliable (generally state sponsored post-WW1) or inaccurate (generally wrong time period).

 

[Encak]

That's the Victoria 2 Culture map at the start of 1836, 392 years after the start of Eu4. Each province shows a percentage of each pop culture in said province. In the eastern bit Anatolia it's pretty heavily split between Armenians and Kurds in each province, with Turks acounting for a little less than a third in what would correspond to Erzurum in Eu4 which is the only place aside from Trebizond where there is a sizable amount in Eastern Anatolia. Greeks are also fairly spread out in Anatolia but constitute a neglible demographic past the coasts. Averaging about 5 percent in the Central Anatolia and around 16% or so around the coasts. I took a look specifically at Western Anatolia and averaged out the percent of Greeks living in each province and tried to give an average percent for the corresponding provinces in Eu4. They are as follows:
Izmit: 18% (Highest City 25%)
Hudavenigar: 13.7% (Highest City 17%)
Izmir: 14.3% (Highest City 29%)
Mentese: 5.5% (Highest City 8%)

For reference here is Edirne and Trebizond which both start of as Greek at the beginning of Eu4
Edirne: 38.2% (Highest City 56%) - This one was a bit difficult as the provinces were harder to match up
Trebizond: 22.5% (Highest City 24%)

If this at all accurate than I think it may be safe to say that the 3 provinces could start out Greek in Eu4. The percentage of Greeks in Edirne and Trebizond dropped by about 70% in 392 years. This means that the western Anatolia would have looked like this
Izmit: ~88%
Hudavingar: ~83.7%
Izmir: ~84%
Mentese: ~75.5%
That is a pretty heavy majority, even if you take into account things like people moving around/getting killed in the initial invasion. (Which i'm not entirely sure of the number of Greek peasants left dead from)
Can someone go check this out for me? Specifically how many Greek left eastern Anatolia and where they went exactly? If they all went to Greece itself that changes things but if they stopped at the Coasts (because there wasn't anywhere left to go really) that may vindicate those numbers.

Edit: I use this because Paradox had researched this themselves in (hopefully) a non-biased manner like we would.

 

[unmerged(375695)]

Very nice research you did. Maybe a clue to expand the discussion.

And do not forget that only christian greeks was listened as greeks.
Muslim greeks was listened at muslims and not as greeks.

My ancestors are from Trapezus. They told us that half of full population who were greek had been muslim, and they had not to leave.

Still today the UNESCO estimates more than 300,000 greek speakers in pontus.

Source: http://www.unesco.org/culture/languages-atlas/index.php

Also even today the people of pontus have greek traditions.

Source: http://www.google.de/imgres?imgurl=...r=370&page=1&start=0&ndsp=25&ved=0CKEBEK0DMBQ

Even today they share relations with the greek culture.

MOdern greek pontians from Thessaloniki

MOdern turkish pontians from Trabzon

 

[unmerged(375695)]

Will an admin ever say something here in this thread?