Cumans/Polovtsians/Kypchaks

kdm · Aug 12, 2012

Here's the long promised research on Cumans/Polovtsians/Kypchaks
This information is taken from Pletnyova + Russian chronicles and covers mostly the areas that bordered with the russian principalities.

Map

Major tribes

Toksoba (rus. Toksobichi, totem swan)
Burdjoghlu (rus. Burchevichi, totem wolf)
Urusoba (rus. Urusobichi, Lukomorci)
Terteroba (rus. Tertrobichi)
Ilbari (rus. Otperlyevichi)
Ulashoghlu (rus. Ulashevichi)

Minor tribes

Targolove
Kayepichi
Chitieevichi
Kolobichi
Etebichi

Also there were "wild polovtsi" (rus. dikie polovtsi) - not belonging to any known tribe

List of people appearing in Russian chronicles between 1180 - 1225

Konchak (Konchek, Kumcheg - meaning 'trousers'). The most powerful polovtsian in 1200. Associated with the Toksoba tribe. -1170, +1203?
Yurii Konchakovich (father Konchak). Described as the most powerful among polovtsian by Russian chronicle in 1223. -1203, +1223 fighting Mongols
Kötöny (rus. Kotyan Sutoevich) of the Tertroba (Durut) tribe. -1202, +1241 in Hungary
Somogur (rus. Somogur Sutoevich, brother of Kötöny) -1202
Togliy (rus. Togliy, Tovliy, Itogli) -1193. Of the Urusobichi tribe. Together with Akush mentioned as the leaders of the Urusobichi tribe
Akush -1193. Of the Urusobichi tribe
Bokmish -1183. Brother of Togliy
Danila (rus. Danila Kobyakovich) of the Urusobichi tribe. Son of Kobyak who was the leader of Urusobichi until 1183 when he was executed by the grand prince of Kiev. -1203, +1223 together with Yurii Konchakovich fighting Mongols
Turunday -1183 as Danila's brother in law
Izay (rus. Izay Bilukovich/Beglukovich) -1193 with Osoluk as the leaders of the Burdjoghlu tribe. Son of Bilyuk/Begluk, leader of Burchevichi in 1170s.
Osoluk -1193 leader of the Burdjoghlu tribe
Gza (rus. Koza Burnovich) -1185 as the leader of the Burdjoghlu tribe
Roman (rus. Roman Gzich) son of Gza Burnovich, -1185
Eldechuk -1185 of the Burdjoghlu tribe
Kopti -1185 khan of the Ulashevichi tribe
Chilbuk -1185 of the Targolove tribe
Basty -1223 described as the polovtsian grand prince
Koldechi, Koban, Begubars, 4x Akochaevichi, Yaropolk Tomzakovich -1190 among others as (minor) polovtsian lords
Barak, Tarh, Sodvak Kulobichskiy, Koryaz Kalotanovich -1183 among others as (minor) polovtsian lords
Barak, Tarh, Bashkort, Tarsuk, Gleb Tiryevich, Yeksn, Alak, Tetiy -1185 among others as (minor) polovtsian lords
Totur, Byakoba, Chugai -1180 among others as (minor) polovtsian lords
Tobasha -1208

Also the following persons mentioned in Byzantine/Bulgar/Hungarian chronicles

Alpamysh -1187 by Niketas Choniates as one of the Cuman comanders
Kocha -1205 as one the Cuman commanders in the army of Kaloyan of Bulgaria
Karas -1208 defeated by Hungarians
Bortz -1227 Cuman warlord baptised by Hungarian Dominican monks

Feudal hierarchy according to Codex Cumanicus
- khan (emperor)
- soltan (rex)
- bek (princep)
- bey (baron)
also
- uzden' (noble)
- kozak (non-noble rider)
- yatuk/zhatak (non-nomad, town-dweller)

Korinov · Aug 12, 2012

Thanks. This certainly helps, as I was unsure about what to do with those lands and people. I suppose we could include them in the mod as different small tribes, since the idea of them marching together to war as some kind of coordinated confederated army does not please me much.

NikeBG · Aug 12, 2012

Great work, kdm! Great work, indeed!

kdm said:
Koldechi, Koban, Begubars, 4x Akochaevichi, Yaropolk Tomzakovich -1190 among others as (minor) polovtsian lords

Just as a note - Koban (also spelled as Guban) was from the Urosoba clan.

kdm said:
Kocha -1205 as one the Cuman commanders in the army of Kaloyan of Bulgaria

In addition, Kocha is probably Begbars of the Kochoba clan (possibly the Begubars above?). Though, for the sake of gameplay, we can keep him as a separate guy, just in case Choniates hadn't misinterpreted his name.

Also, we can add Suto Terteroba to the list as well, considering his sons (Kotyan and Somogur) seem to appear on the scene a couple of years later (so Suto was probably still alive in 1200).

And a few more clans in our area - Olberli, Kay, Itogli. Etioba might also be a bit further east.

Also, some general info in the posts on this page.

kdm said:
Feudal hierarchy according to Codex Cumanicus
- khan (emperor)
- soltan (rex)
- bek (princep)
- bey (baron)
also
- uzden' (noble)
- kozak (non-noble rider)
- yatuk/zhatak (non-nomad, town-dweller)

Just to note also that according to the supporters of the Pax Nomadica idea, the "imperial title" of the nomads was "khagan", while "khan" is the regal one and became imperial only after Genghis Khan (respectively, the Codex Cumanicus is after Genghis as well). Though considering how close AD1200 is to Genghis' rise, I guess we could say that change in titles has already happened.

kdm · Aug 12, 2012

Korinov said:
I suppose we could include them in the mod as different small tribes, since the idea of them marching together to war as some kind of coordinated confederated army does not please me much.

I would certainly hope not. Even though they never formed a single state and could be better described as a confederacy of tribes, they have a long history of cooperating with each other. E.g. in 1185 Konchak called upon Toksobichi, Kolobichi, Yetebichi, Tertrobichi, Targolove, Ulashevichi, Burchevichi i.e. all the major and minor tribes to fight the raiding army of Igor of Novgorod-Severskiy. It is clear that even though he was not the ruler of all the tribes, he had a significant influence on their foreign policy and regarded as the most senior among polovtsians. So I believe we should make Konchak the head of Cuman faction in game.

NikeBG said:
Just as a note - Koban (also spelt as Guban) was from the Urosoba clan.

Depends how you "read" the chronicle - Pletnyova reads "Koldechi, Koban, both Urusobichi, Begubars, 4 Akochaevichi, ...". It is not clear if Koldechi and Koban were Urusobichi or there were 2 other unnamed Urusobichi. But for the game sake we can assume they were Urusobichi

NikeBG said:
In addition, Kocha is probably Begbars of the Kochoba clan (possibly the Begubars above?). Though, for the sake of gameplay, we can keep him as a separate guy, just in case Choniates hadn't misinterpreted his name.

Begubars might have been son of Kocha or Akocha hence Begubars Akochaevich. It is unlikely they are the same person though

NikeBG said:
Also, we can add Suto Terteroba to the list as well, considering his sons (Kotyan and Somogur) seem to appear on the scene a couple of years later (so Suto was probably still alive in 1200).

I thought about that too but there is no mentioning of Sutoy (not Suto because Kotyan Sutoyevich not Sutovich) anywhere. It seems like after 1200 Tertroba suddenly became very strong in the western part of Cumania - perhaps because they were fighting Byzantines as allies of Bulgaria

NikeBG said:
And a few more clans in our area - Olberli, Kay, Itogli. Etioba might also be a bit further east.

Olberli is the same as the major tribe Ilbari in Volga area
Kay is a minor tribe Kayepichi
Itogly is the clan of Togliy which I put as a leader Urusobichi. We can separate them from Urusobichi and place on the immediate west of Urusobichi, just across the Dnepr
Etioba is a minor tribe Etebichi

NikeBG said:
Just to note also that according to the supporters of the Pax Nomadica idea, the "imperial title" of the nomads was "khagan", while "khan" is the regal one and became imperial only after Genghis Khan (respectively, the Codex Cumanicus is after Genghis as well). Though considering how close AD1200 is to Genghis' rise, I guess we could say that change in titles has already happened.

Had they formed a single state before Mongols came, Konchak or his son Yurii might have attained the title Khagan. But that didn't happen so Russian chronicles call them simply khans.

NikeBG · Aug 12, 2012

kdm said:
Had they formed a single state before Mongols came, Konchak or his son Yurii might have attained the title Khagan. But that didn't happen so Russian chronicles call them simply khans.

Which is why "khan" was not equal to "emperor" (even for supporters of the Pax Nomadica idea) in those times and became (more or less) so only after Genghis.

kdm · Aug 12, 2012

NikeBG said:
kdm said:

Had they formed a single state before Mongols came, Konchak or his son Yurii might have attained the title Khagan. But that didn't happen so Russian chronicles call them simply khans.

Click to expand...

Which is why "khan" was not equal to "emperor" (even for supporters of the Pax Nomadica idea) in those times and became (more or less) so only after Genghis.

Ah I see what you mean

. I think the author of Codex Cumanicus exaggerated the importance of Cuman titles - khan is certainly not the emperor and soltan is not a king.

On a separate note while reading Galich-Volyn chronicle in a search for polovtsian names I noticed there are lots of Hungarian and Polish nobles mentioned. After the fall of Roman the Great both in 1205 Hungary and Poland tried to take Galich from Roman's son Danilo who was only 4 years old so both kings on several occasions sent troops to Galicia.

Is it not to late to add some more people to both kingdoms? I believe we are still a bit thin on the Hungarians ingame

NikeBG · Aug 13, 2012

It's never too late, IMO.

Cèsar de Quart · Aug 13, 2012

kdm said:
NikeBG said:

kdm said:

Had they formed a single state before Mongols came, Konchak or his son Yurii might have attained the title Khagan. But that didn't happen so Russian chronicles call them simply khans.

Click to expand...

Which is why "khan" was not equal to "emperor" (even for supporters of the Pax Nomadica idea) in those times and became (more or less) so only after Genghis.

Click to expand...

Ah I see what you mean . I think the author of Codex Cumanicus exaggerated the importance of Cuman titles - khan is certainly not the emperor and soltan is not a king.

On a separate note while reading Galich-Volyn chronicle in a search for polovtsian names I noticed there are lots of Hungarian and Polish nobles mentioned. After the fall of Roman the Great both in 1205 Hungary and Poland tried to take Galich from Roman's son Danilo who was only 4 years old so both kings on several occasions sent troops to Galicia.

Is it not to late to add some more people to both kingdoms? I believe we are still a bit thin on the Hungarians ingame

Please, do so! Only make sure you know where do they come from, or what their estates (castles) are.

kdm · Aug 14, 2012

Can somebody please point me in the direction of the original research on Hungary. I know the search button is supposed to be my friend but it fails me today :oops:

. I mean I cannot find anything

MihailoSRB · Aug 14, 2012

I think there was only a Hungarian Medieval Army Thread.
But perhaps there was more than jsut army research there, I can't really remember, so you'll have to check it out.

Korinov · Aug 14, 2012

There was.

Lord Szentgyorgyi said:
Hi!

Sorry for taking so long, but I had a busy month, and very little time to spare on research. But as I promissed I made a map which you can use. I'll finish the family tree too in short time.

Before you look at the map, there are a few things I think I should tell you. First off, you should know the Kingdom of Hungary was more centralized in that period than other feudal states, and the power of the nobles was far weaker. These nobles owned castles, small towns etc., but those weren't very important. The kingdom itself had a very unique administrative structure, based on small territories called 'varmegye' roughly translated as castle-county. There were more than 70 such territories, each with a strong main castle as a centre, with an appointed governor called the 'ispan'. This rank was given to the nobles most trusted by the king, therefore it was a very unstable position, since it couldn't be inherited, some ispans owned the title for months, others for years. These main castles were mostly owned by the king, and the nobles appointed as the ispan of the castle were more happier to govern these castles than their own fiefs. Besides the varmegye system, there were other separate administrative territories. Certain ethnic groups were given priveledges for their economic or military services. The seklers (a magyar group with a strong and unique regional identity) were organized in so-called 'szek' (seats) and had a very strong autonomy in change for their military service. The saxons were also organized seperately in burgs, and also had special rights for the trade they made. In the southern part, Hungary was organized into larger units called 'bansag' (banate), with the appointed governer as 'ban'. These banates (with the exception of Croatia and Slavonia) were very unstable due to constant war in the region and only belonged to Hungary in certain periods. And beyond all these, certain cities (the more important centers, the more developed ones) received the title of 'szabad kiralyi varos' (free royal cities) which freed them from the rule of the ispan or ban who controlled the surounding region, and placed them directly under the rule of the king.
So this is how the kingdom is organized, and you can understand that the varmegye centers - the castles, and the free cities were much more important in the kingdom, for both the king and the nobles, than the smaller insignificant castles owned by the nobles. Most of the times in case of an attack an ispan of a varmegye would rather defend the kings castle rather than his own fief. This is why I chosed to present the important castles, rather than the fiefs of the noble clans (though I squeezed a few of those in too). I think you should consider adding more cities, since it would be strange to have 25 castles and only 3 cities, even so some of the castles I've put on the map were more like cities. I made the map with 6 cities and 20 castles, but if you prefer, you can change some of the cities into castles, it's your choice. (the cities are numerotated in the order of the importance)

So here's the map

The black dots are cities, red dots are castles, purple dots are villages

cities-villages
1.Szekesfehervar--10.Tata,15.Kalocsa
2.Pecs--13.Szigetvar,14.Mohacs
3.Varad--24.Debrecen,25.Szatmar
4.Gyulafehervar--20.Hunyadvar,22.Kukullovar
5.Pozsony--32.Moson,31.Szentgyorgy
6.Zara--1.Zengg,2.Bribir

castles-villages
1.Buda--12.Pest
2.Visegrad--11.Esztergom
3.Gyor--9.Komarom
4.Veszprem--8.Papa
5.Kanizsa--5.Varasd
6.Nyitra--29.Selmecbanya
7.Trencsen--30.Turoc
8.Szeged--18.Csanad
9.Szolnok--16.Kecskemet
10.Eger--27.Miskolc
11.Szepesi Var--28.Kassa
12.Ungvar--26.Szabolcs
13.Kolozsvar--23.Kraszna
14.Brasso--21.Szeben
15.Temesvar--19.Arad
16.Petervarad--17.Bacs
17.Pozsegavar--3.Sziszek
18.Zagrab--4.Zagrab
19.Sopron--7.Sopron
20.Koszg--6.Szentgotthard

You can also see from the map the borders of the kingdom. Red is the color of Hungary proper, blues is for the croatian provinces (they should aslo be part of the kingdom), and the purple is for the borders of the unstable banates, no to be included in the kingdom.

Lord Szentgyorgyi said:
About Oltenia -- I don't know what other people called it (Oltenia is a romanian word), the hungarians called the region 'Szorenyi bansag'. It did have a castle - Szorenyvar, significant in the banate, but insignificant in the kingdom. The place was populated by cuman nomads, vlach shepards, maybe some bulgarians too. It really lacked organization, and as I said before, it was very unstable. Your solution will probably be the best, throw in a load of steppe bandits and looters.

As for the other two banates - Bosnia (split into smaller banates with names I can't remember right now) and northern Serbia (Macsoi Bansag), I think it would be best to split them, give the northern part to Hungary, the southern part to Serbia (or Raska, whatever you want to call the serbs). 1 castle+1 town for both regions would be more than enough. This could represent that it was a disputed territory. What do you say?

And I think I can help you with that coastline, and what you plan on doing would be partly good, if I remember it right, some castles did have the same name as the island, but I'll look more into it tonight.

Also, I finished the research with the noble families. I came up with a list with more than enough nobles. I made it so that the lords were alive and mature in the period (1200 ± 10 years). I can also provide coat of arms for most of them. Just tell me how many lords you plan for Hungary, and I'll make a selecction from the list. Unfortunately I couldn't find the names of the wifes for most of the lords, since they are from a very early period, but I could map the family relations. If this bothers you, I can make a new selection from a later period (the second half of the XIII century), since more accurate details survived from later times.

Anyway, here's the list I came up with, there are more than 50 lords, so as I said, more than enough.

King Imre (crowned in 1196 at the age of 22) 26 yo. in 1200
-both parents dead in 1200
-wife: Constance of Aragon (sister of Peter II of Aragon)
-children: Laszlo (later Laszlo III of Hungary) (born in 1199 or 1201 -uncertain, no need to include him)
-brother: Andras (later Andras II of Hungary) 24 yo. in 1200, he was the throne claimant, heavily opposed his
brother, King Imre, and even fought battles against him. He made peace with his brother, promissed to support
Imre's son, Laszlo as the rightfull heir to the throne, but as soon as Imre died in 1204, after the coronation of
Laszlo III, Andras exiled his nephew, and after the kid died, had himself crowned as Andras II King of Hungary in
1205.

Jak nembeli Mika Nador (palatine)

Job the 'Wise' Archbishop of Esztergom

Kan nembeli Peter Archbishop of Kalocsa

Bor-Kalan nembeli Bank ban
wife: Melinda (supposed name)

Eth erdelyi vajda

Kan nembeli Laszlo
son: Kan nembeli Gyula

Apafi Ant---------brother-------Apafi Becse
son: Apafi Ant son: Apafi Becse
son:Apafi Jakab son:Apafi Janos
son:Apafi Janos

Almadi "Nagy" Atyusz-------brother----Almadi Istvan----brother---Almadi Miska
son: Vazsony Atyusz son:Almadi Miska
son: Almadi Lorinc Poharnokmester son:Almadi Salamon
son: Almadi Denes

Hahot nembeli Buzad
son: Hahot nembeli Arnold
son: Hahot nembeli Buzad

Csak nembeli Ugrin Ersek----br----Csak nembeli Miklos -----br----Csak nembeli Mate Tarnokmester

Csanad nembeli Benedek---br-----Csanad nembeli "Nagy" Fulop----br-------CSanad nembeli Bogyoszlo
son:Csanad nembeli Kelemen ban son:Kecele
son:Csanad nembeli Waffa son:Tivadar
son:Keme

Frangepan Guido ---------brother----------(Frangepan Bertalan (dead))
son: Frangepan Janos son:Frangepan Guido
son: Frangepan Marton son:Frangepan Henrik

Heder nembeli Henc-------------nephews-------------------------|-----------------------------------------|
son:Heder nembeli Mihaly |_____cousins----Heder nembeli Heder---brother---Heder nembeli Denes
son:heder nembeli Koszegi Henrik |

Pecz nembeli Lukacs

Rathold nembeli Leusztak
son: Rathold nembeli Rathold
son: Rathold nembeli Gyula

Subic Gergely
son:Subic Visen
son:Subic Gergely
son:Subic Pribina
son:Subic Mark - wife:Ilona

Hontpazmany nembeli Csekleszi Pal----brother----Hontpazmany nembeli Szentgyorgyi Tamas

Tomaj nembeli Denes----brother---Tomaj nembeli Leusztak

Kaplony nembeli Karolyi Andras

Zsamboki Smaragdus

Koppan nembeli Cseszneky Apa

Lord Szentgyorgyi said:
Btw, if you take a look at the noble namews, you'll find them to be long and weird. That's because the naming in that period was weird. I'll give you a wild example:

Hontpazmany nembeli Bazini csaladbeli Vajk fia Pecsi "Vitez" Henrik kalocsai ersek --> names like this could exist

Hontpazmany nembeli - the name of the larger and older family name (something like a clan) from which the family rised, it translates as 'from the clan of Hontpazmany'

Bazini csaladbeli - the name of a smaller noble family name, translates as 'from the family of Bazini'

Vajk fia - the name of the father of the individual, translates 'son of Vajk'

Pecsi - the fief the individual owns, and tends to become the surname of the individual and his descendents, thus forming another family, translates as 'Pecsi' ('of Pecs' to be more exact)

"Vitez" - an adjective, it translates as "the brave"

Henrik - the nickname

kalocsai ersek - a rank or function the individual has, in this case 'bishop of Kalocsa'

So to translate it to english the name would sound something like:

Vajk's son, Henrik 'the Brave' of Pecs, from the Bazini family, from the Hontpazmany clan, bishop of Kalocsa

Names like this did exist back in those days, in the list I provided non of the lords have all the elements, because they either didn't have them or I shortened them a bit to more resonable lenght.

Lord Szentgyorgyi said:
Ok, so here's the list of lords. I had to cut down on some of the families, so I could represent more of the most important families, which brings it to 33 lords, I hope it's not too much.

King Imre (crowned in 1196 at the age of 22) 26 yo. in 1200
-both parents dead in 1200
-wife: Constance of Aragon (sister of Peter II of Aragon)
-children: Laszlo (later Laszlo III of Hungary) (born in 1199 or 1201 -uncertain, no need to include him)
-brother: Andras (later Andras II of Hungary) 24 yo. in 1200, he was the throne claimant, heavily opposed his brother, King Imre, and even fought battles against him. He made peace with his brother, promissed to support Imre's son, Laszlo as the rightfull heir to the throne, but as soon as Imre died in 1204, after the coronation of Laszlo III, Andras exiled his nephew, and after the kid died, had himself crowned as Andras II King of Hungary in 1205.

1 Jak nembeli Mika nador wife: Emese

2 'Tudos' Job esztergomi ersek

3 Kan nembeli Peter kalocsai ersek

4 Bor-Kalan nembeli Bank ban wife: Melinda (supposed name)

5 Eth erdelyi vajda wife:Sarolt

6 Kan nembeli Laszlo wife:Gizella
7 son: Kan nembeli Gyula

8 Almadi "Nagy" Atyusz wife:Ildiko
9 son: Vazsony Atyusz wife:Anna
10 son: Almadi Lorinc Poharnokmester

11 Hahot nembeli Buzad wife:Izabella
12 son: Hahot nembeli Arnold

13 Csak nembeli Ugrin ersek--brother--14 Csak nembeli Miklos------brother--15 Csak nembeli Mate tarnokmester

16 Csanad nembeli Benedek---------brother----17 Csanad nembeli "Nagy" Fulop wife:Csilla
wife:Reka
18 son:Csanad nembeli Kelemen ban

19 Frangepan Guido wife:Maria
20 son: Frangepan Janos

21 Heder nembeli Henc wife:Julia
22 son:heder nembeli Koszegi Henrik

23 Rathold nembeli Leustak wife:Agota
24 son: Rathold nembeli Rathold
25 son: Rathold nembeli Gyula

26 Subic Gergely wife:Kinga
27 son:Subic Mark - wife:Ilona (real)

28 Hontpazmany nembeli Csekleszi Pal----brother----29 Hontpazmany nembeli Szentgyorgyi Tamas
wife:Jolanta wife:Agnes

30 Tomaj nembeli Denes----brother---31 Tomaj nembeli Leustak

32 Gutkeled nembeli Apaj wifeiroska

33 Gyor nembeli Pat

For sisters/daughters etc. you can chose from a list of names (add them randomly, since not much records remain of the real female family members from those times)

Anna
Aniko
Aranka
Agnes
Agota
Arvacska
Boglarka
Boroka
Csilla
Etelka
Feherke
Gyongyi
Gyopar
Hajnalka
Ibolya
Ildiko
Jolanka
Kata
Kera
Lenke
Olga
Piroska
Reka
Rozsa
Sarolt
Sarolta
Viola

And Cruger's tips regarding certain issues (I agreed, and agree, with):

[quote author="Cruger"]Well, first of all, 6 cities for Hungary is crazy. If I were you I would go with 4, maybe 3. Which ones of the candidates you choose should imo depend on convinience for gameplay, and not importance (they all were important enough to become cities after all).

Also, I strongly disagree with his suggestions to make the banates not a part of the kingdom (except Bosnia, which if you ask me should be its own faction), and giving them to Serbia is just a mad. If it were up to me I would make Bosnia independent, and the other banates a part of Hungary.
[/quote]

NikeBG · Aug 15, 2012

Which reminds me - do we actually have queens in the game? Or, if not, can we make them (I think Warband didn't have married rulers, but maybe it allows it, or not?)? And if we can have queens, can they be related to people of other factions? Thus, f.e., King Imre's wife would have her relations with Aragon, Tsar Kaloyan's wife would have her relations with the Cumans (f.e. Burdjogli) etc, which would (at least theoretically, though maybe not in-game?) strengthen the relations between these factions?

MihailoSRB · Aug 15, 2012

NikeBG said:
Which reminds me - do we actually have queens in the game? Or, if not, can we make them (I think Warband didn't have married rulers, but maybe it allows it, or not?)? And if we can have queens, can they be related to people of other factions? Thus, f.e., King Imre's wife would have her relations with Aragon, Tsar Kaloyan's wife would have her relations with the Cumans (f.e. Burdjogli) etc, which would (at least theoretically, though maybe not in-game?) strengthen the relations between these factions?

We have queens, but they act like ordinary ladies.

kdm · Aug 15, 2012

Hmm looks like we are actually not thin on the Hungarians in game and we have a very solid research

Anyway, I tried to match the list of people mentioned in the Russian chronicle against the list we have in game and found that some of them are already in-game but some are not

- 1205
Mogh - royal palatine in 1192-1193, 1198-1199, 1206, not in the list

- 1208
Benedek - royal palatine in 1202-1204 and voivode of Transilvania in 1201–1206 and 1206-1209, he appears to be in the list from Lord Szentgyorgyi as Csanad nembeli Benedek

- 1210
Poth - royal palatine in 1208-1211, he appears to be in the list from Lord Szentgyorgyi as Gyor nembeli Pat
Petrus son of Turoy - comes curiales, not in the list
Bank - royal palatine in 1212-1213, ban of Slavonia in 1208-1209, 1217-1218, he appears to be in the list from Lord Szentgyorgyi as Bor-Kalan nembeli Bank ban
Mika - royal palatine in 1199-1201, he appears to be in the list from Lord Szentgyorgyi as Jak nembeli Mika nador
Mogh (again)
Tiborc ? not in the list
Marcel - comes curiales, comes of Bachka, not in the list

I'm not familiar with the history of Hungary at all so cannot say if the missing people have to be ingame. Would be nice if Lord Szentgyorgyi could take a look

MihailoSRB · Sep 20, 2012

Just bumping this thread - we'll need it for the future.

kdm · Oct 15, 2012

I think implementing these tribes as independent states is fine provided other states cannot conquer their territory

- This can be done e.g. by not allowing wars between Cumans and other states. On the other hand they can raid and you can raid their moving camps
- Or maybe you can declare war on them but they cannot siege settlements and their camps are not siege-able. Again with this option you can only raid their settlements

Also it would be nice to be able to hire the entire tribe as an auxiliary. The lord with his tribe would follow you like your fellow lords. You should be able to hire them in person or by sending a companion as a messenger

So essentially I suggest making them a half-state/half-steppe bandits. In fact maybe the whole feature can be implemented based on bandits

All of this would reflect the reality of Cuman tribes in 1200AD. Rus, Hungary, Georgia and Volga Bulgar were not interested at all in subjugating cumans but instead used them as auxiliaries in their wars

What do you think - does it make sense? Can it be implemented in game? I guess this question is more for Korinov

MihailoSRB · Oct 17, 2012

kdm said:
I think implementing these tribes as independent states is fine provided other states cannot conquer their territory
- This can be done e.g. by not allowing wars between Cumans and other states. On the other hand they can raid and you can raid their moving camps
- Or maybe you can declare war on them but they cannot siege settlements and their camps are not siege-able. Again with this option you can only raid their settlements
Also it would be nice to be able to hire the entire tribe as an auxiliary. The lord with his tribe would follow you like your fellow lords. You should be able to hire them in person or by sending a companion as a messenger
So essentially I suggest making them a half-state/half-steppe bandits. In fact maybe the whole feature can be implemented based on bandits
All of this would reflect the reality of Cuman tribes in 1200AD. Rus, Hungary, Georgia and Volga Bulgar were not interested at all in subjugating cumans but instead used them as auxiliaries in their wars
What do you think - does it make sense? Can it be implemented in game? I guess this question is more for Korinov

Well, it a question for Korinov and for the guys who know the history of those poeple.
I am neither, but I think it's a very interesting suggestion, and that it would be nice to have that unique bandit-faction in the game.

NikeBG · Oct 17, 2012

Yes, I like the idea as well, as long as there is a way to defeat them and/or conquer them. Otherwise, imagine having conquered the *whole* Eastern Europe (through many efforts and in-game years or simply by being a cheater) except for some pesky Cumans, which your mighty armies can crush in an instant, but you just aren't allowed to conquer them - that's bad game design.

But, otherwise, the option to "hire" an entire tribe (either by payment as mercenaries, or with shared loot as allies, or with royal marriage as allies, or simply with superb persuasion etc) appeals to me quite well.

Alex_S · Oct 17, 2012

The idea is certainly interesting but I see a couple of problems
For one there has to be a way for the mobile camps to stay within their territory or move to territories they intend to conquer;
It would look a bit silly for a Cuman camp to go off on it's merry way and set up in Italy or France.
And the second problem is that there has to be a way of representing the sedentary peoples found within Cuman territory in 1200; so this would lead to a hybrid faction, one that has both mobile camps and villages/towns/castles inhabited by other cultures.
In fact a fully neutral/bandit faction would have no way of expanding or being conquered making it very uninteresting to play with.

kdm · Oct 18, 2012

Alex_S said:
For one there has to be a way for the mobile camps to stay within their territory or move to territories they intend to conquer;
It would look a bit silly for a Cuman camp to go off on it's merry way and set up in Italy or France.

I suggested that their movable camps roam within their territory. And because they cannot siege castles/towns of other states there is no reason for them to move to Italy/France. Cuman lords on the other hand do not have to move with their camps - they behave like all other lords, just don't start sieges on their own. They can only raid or join lords from other states on campaigns when they are hired

Alex_S said:
And the second problem is that there has to be a way of representing the sedentary peoples found within Cuman territory in 1200; so this would lead to a hybrid faction, one that has both mobile camps and villages/towns/castles inhabited by other cultures.

I'm confused. Are you talking about Brodniki here?

Alex_S said:
In fact a fully neutral/bandit faction would have no way of expanding or being conquered making it very uninteresting to play with.

Well we have plenthy of other factions to play with. Cumans did not really have the state at that time so they had no interest in expanding into Europe - it doesn't have sufficient space for horse-grazing apart from Hungary. Instead they already occupied all the plains from Danube to Mongolia and their only interest lay in raiding the settled nations

Cumans/Polovtsians/Kypchaks

Users who are viewing this thread

kdm

Sergeant

Korinov

Knight at Arms

NikeBG

Baron

kdm

Sergeant

NikeBG

Baron

kdm

Sergeant

NikeBG

Baron

Cèsar de Quart

Master Knight

kdm

Sergeant

MihailoSRB

Korinov

Knight at Arms

NikeBG

Baron

MihailoSRB

kdm

Sergeant

MihailoSRB

kdm

Sergeant

MihailoSRB

NikeBG

Baron

Alex_S

Sergeant

kdm

Sergeant

Similar threads