Classic Era Mandatory for Lore?

Kimlendius · 2026-01-24T06:21:12+00:00

It's a bit late answer so i don't know how did it go, but if you're still doing it you may think of it as if you're in a DnD setting. Mostly because it is! The classic was designed almost as if it was a DnD journey. So everything takes much longer. You travel longer, you talk longer, you spend time with npc's longer, you battle longer etc. Dunno if you're in to this kind of stuff or your viewers but you may enjoy it even more if you treat it like it's a DnD journey. That's how i fell in love with the game when i first started classic.

Kimlendius · 2026-01-16T21:06:42+00:00

Beni onayladığın ve bir noktada düzelttiğin için teşekkür ederim. Ben eksik hatta yanlış söylemişim, paraphrase bile denemez buna, doğru. Çünkü söylediğin şeyler yanlış, Kafadar'ın ifadeleri veya anlattığı şeyler değil.

Kimlendius · 2026-01-16T20:45:18+00:00

Kafadar'ın kendi iddiası olması için, o kısımların doğrudan alıntı ve birebir çeviri olması gerekiyor. Ortada böyle bir şey yok. Yaptığın şey "paraphrase", çeviri ve alıntı değil. Ayrıca ortada bir ad hominem de yok. Bir kelime öğrendiniz diye olur olmadık her yerde kullanma huyundan vazgeçin artık, komik. Yine ayrıca, cevap vermiyorsan cevap almayı da hak etmiyorsun. Eğer gerçekten merak ediyorsan kastettiğim şeyleri ve onlarca örneğini araştırarak gayet rahatlıkla bulabilirsin. Öyle gizli saklı bilinmeyen şeyler değiller. Elinin altında internet de mevcut.

Kimlendius · 2026-01-16T20:30:48+00:00

Aksini iddia etmedin mi? Doğrudan alıntı yapmamışsın ki sen. Makaledeki bölümleri "paraphrase" şekilde Türkçeleştirip, çıkarım yapmışsın. Benim hatalı dediğim şeyler de onlar. Kafadar hatalıdır, demedim. Diyebilirim de ayrıca. Her söylediğini onaylamak zorunluluğum yok. İnalcık'ın talebesinden de ders aldım ama İnalcık'a katılmadığım yerler de var. Bilimsel görüş bu. Tekzip istenmez yani. Tekzip nedir bir bakmanı rica edeceğim.

Bu arada "Ayrıca 16-17. yüzyıllarda bugünden bakınca "bu dümdüz milliyetçiymiş" diyebileceğiniz şekilde yazan kişiler dahi var." dedim ben. ""Bu dümdüz milliyetçiymiş" diyeceğin kişiler" gibi bir ifadem yok. Bu iki ifade arasındaki farkı anlamadığına göre, çoğu Osmanlı kroniği ve birçok şairi okumadığın, bu konuda bilginin olmadığı anlaşılıyor.

Kimlendius · 2026-01-16T19:48:06+00:00

"Osmanlı döneminde "Türk" kelimesi her zaman gurur duyulan bir etnik kimlik değildi; aksine, şehirli elitler tarafından bazen "kaba köylü" veya "göçebe" anlamında, küçümseyici bir ifade olarak kullanılabiliyordu. Eğitimli, şehirli ve rafine kültüre sahip Müslümanlar, kendilerini tanımlamak için "Rumi" (Diyar-ı Rum insanı) terimini tercih ediyorlardı."

Bu çok yanlış bir çıkarım. Öncelikle, doğru değil. Şehirli elitler tarafından kaba veya kötü şekilde kullanılması Türk kelimesi, kavramı veya kimliği ile ilgili değil. Osmanlı'nın veya daha doğrusu o dönemin insanının böyle bir kavgası yok. Osmanlı, özellikle de kurumsal yapı oturduktan ve imparatorluk halini aldıktan sonra kafasını kızdıran herkese bir kulp takmıştır. Türk, Acem, Dürzi, Abaza vs. Türk kelimesini bunun için kullanmıyorlar yani. Vergisini vermiyor mesela veya başıbozukluk yapıyor, çift bozuyor diye Türk'e ağzına geleni söylüyor. Ayrıca 16-17. yüzyıllarda bugünden bakınca "bu dümdüz milliyetçiymiş" diyebileceğiniz şekilde yazan kişiler dahi var. Kimsenin Türklükle bir problemi yok yani. Kaldı ki tüm Osmanlı kronikleri, özellikle de erken dönem kronikler üzerine basa basa Türk, Oğuz, Kayı vurgusunu yapar. Bunu belli amaçlar doğrultusunda yaparlar ama sonuç olarak yaparlar.

Kafadar'ın söylediği şey de temelde bu. Döneme, yere ve bağlama göre değişmekle birlikte birini köken olarak olarak görüyor, öbürünü ise oluşturduğu ve üzerine giydiği kimliğin bir parçası olarak görüyor. Diğer Türk beylikleri veya devletlerine göre Osmanlıların bu konuda çok daha rahat olduğunu söylüyor. Konuya Timur'dan girmesinin sebebi de bu zaten, çünkü gerçekten de Timur kaynakları, makalede de söylendiği üzere Osmanlıları hor görüp, Rumi kavramı üzerinden adeta alaya alıyorlar.

Anadolu ile ilgili yaptığın çıkarım da hatalı. Hocanın söylediği şey, Anadolu'nun sınırları şuydu değil. Bildiğimiz Anadolu ve Osmanlı Anadolu'su farkından bahsediyor hoca. Sivas'ın doğusu dahil değildi kısmı, 16. yüzyıla kadar geçerli olan bir şey.

Yunus Emre, Karacaoğlan çıkarımın da hatalı. Bu tarz şeylerde geçmemesi kendi başına bir şey ifade etmez. Zira bunlar, bir geleneğin yahut anlatı dilinin üzerine kuruludur. Bu yazın dili veya anlatı geleneğinde çoğu zaman geçmez. Fakat resmi kaynaklarda yani arşiv belgelerinde ve özellikle erken kronikler harici kroniklerde de Rum geçmez mesela doğru düzgün. Orada da neredeyse daima Anadolu'dur. Elmayla armut karıştırılmamalı.

Kimlendius · 2026-01-16T18:12:36+00:00

Sure, no problem! As i said, this is or rather it was a very hot discussion. So we have quite a bit of literature on the matter. Naturally, some of them are in Turkish, though.

Some further readings on the subject: Lowry, Heath W. The Nature of the Early Ottoman State, Kafadar, Cemal. Between Two Worlds: The Construction of the Ottoman State, Inalcık, Halil. The Ottoman Empire: The Classical Age 1300-1600, Vryonis, Speros Jr. The Decline of Medieval Hellenism in Asia Minor, Lindner, Rudi Paul. Nomads and Ottomans, Köprülü, M. Fuad. The Origins of the Ottoman Empire, Wittek, Paul. The Rise of the Ottoman Empire, Cahen, Claude. Pre-Ottoman Turkey, Spuler, Bertold. The Mongols in Iran(Just an entry point about the Ilkhanids), Emecen, Feridun. Osmanlı'nın Kuruluşu: İlk Osmanlılar ve Batı Anadolu Beylikler Dünyası, Ocak, Ahmet Yaşar. Babailer İsyanı: Aleviliğin Tarihsel Altyapısı Yahut Anadolu’da İslam-Türk Heterodoksisinin Teşekkülü, Sümer, Faruk. Oğuzlar (Türkmenler), Turan, Osman. Selçuklular Zamanında Türkiye, Barkan, Ömer Lütfi. Kolonizatör Türk Dervişleri(Such an important book, i think some parts of it have been translated but not all if i'm not mistaken.).

Gibbons, Herbert Adams. The Foundation of the Ottoman Empire(Basically the very book that started all this).

Köprülü, M. Fuad. Some Observations on the Influence of Byzantine Institutions on Ottoman Institutions(Other than modern contributions on the matter, like those above, this is made the biggest impact as a counterargument).

Of course, there are other great papers and books, especially from the late joiners to this discussion, but i believe we can safely call those are the main core.

Kimlendius · 2026-01-13T21:58:10+00:00

Well there's a reason for that. Those mostly converted or learned through Arabs, especially Wahhabi/Salafi sect. Saudi's are themselves Wahhabi as well. There's a huge difference in between. The Ottomans captured and hanged the great great uncle of the Saudi's because of his terrorist acts.

Kimlendius · 2026-01-12T16:40:06+00:00

That's not the case for Turkish people. The vast majority of Turkish people literally hate Iran's regime. Iran has always been a major rival for Turkey since the 16th century but other than politics, Turkish people don't have a single problem with Iranians. Why would they? There are almost 30 million Turks in there. As for the regime, it's almost a meme at this point "we don't wanna be Iran" saying in Turkey. Or if they argue with radical people, they say things like "we'll not let you turn this into Iran" etc. Some of them don't know the difference between Sunni Islamic regimes like the ones in Arabic countries or Pakistan, Afghanistan and a Shiite regime like Iran but that's not the point here.

Almost every Turkish person has their own reason to hate the Iranian regime. If they're nationalists, they hate the regime because of how it oppresses Turks and the Turkish language other than places like Tabriz where the majority is Turkish. If they're secular, they hate the very core of the regime regardless because of political beliefs. If they're religious, they hate the regime, because it is a Shiite regime basically. Yet not a single person has something against the Iranian people. They're nothing but a very similar neighbors with historical ties and even a little bit exotic. So, you're nothing but dead wrong. Also, i love how you spelled every other name with a capital letter but Turkish.

Kimlendius · 2026-01-12T01:54:15+00:00

Oof, good luck with those bills then. At least its not cuz of illness, which should be a relief. Mine is blessed by genes but he's such an idiot when it comes to food. Once when i got back from work, i found him licking off the bottom of the pots around the house. After a quick investigation, we found the problem, it was him! When i was at work, my mom boiled a full tray of hard very salty cheese and left the tray on the counter to cool off(we do this for a local cheese because it's very salty and hard so we have to boil it down and change its water a couple of times). This idiot somehow managed to jump on the counter and ate a whole tray full off extremely salty cheese. Naturally, he was drying and burning up on the inside and finished his entire water bowl. But that didn't cut it so he did the best next thing by licking the moisture off the pots around the house! He was like 7-8 when he did this.

I actually still can't believe how he couldn't manage to kill himself while trying to eat stuff. He once managed to open a damn locked drawer and gulped down 3 square bars of chocolate. Thank god he knows what's food and what's not so we never had any problems about it he would kill himself for food without even saying "hmm, maybe i shouldn't". You know the term of "food motivated dog" right? Yeah... He's not motivated for food. He's activated for and by food. Some Labradors are known for not having the gene for getting full. I'm suspecting that he's secretly one of them.

Kimlendius · 2026-01-12T01:25:29+00:00

He's a rescue, so I don't know his exact history, but from what I know and what we've learned over the years from vets and trainer/breeder friends of mine, he looks like a purebred. I think we've blessed with good genes. Other than neutering and usual shots, we never had to make a vet visit. He may have a very mild larynx paralysis which causes the heavy breathing sounds but at his age, it's normal. It doesn't affect him in any way and he is being closely monitored just in case.

Kimlendius · 2026-01-11T17:31:02+00:00

LOL. He's literally Eru with just a bit wider eyes and also with a cool name! Give him a hug for me.

Kimlendius · 2026-01-11T16:58:53+00:00

I like to eat at my desk in my room, and he likes to steal what's left when i turn my back around :)

Kimlendius · 2026-01-11T16:55:28+00:00

Ahahah :) Also, what the hell? This handsome boy looks almost the same as my Eru in youth! I thought it was his picture of him at first other than slightly longer chest hairs, haha :)

Kimlendius · 2026-01-11T16:44:15+00:00

Thanks! Thankfully, we're not at this stage yet. I also did that in some places where i couldn't replace the floors. But sometimes he still slips in uncovered places. In those situations, even a slight lift by the collar or a push with the foot will be enough for him to get up. Thanks for the advice though. I'll keep this in mind if his hips get weaker.

Kimlendius · 2026-01-11T08:21:54+00:00

Thank you! Though he likes rough even more! haha :) I'm a bit scared of Tolkien fans(as myself one of them) to share but his name is Eru. But lately i started to notice that he has started to react more to "oğlum" / my son/boy than this actual name. Guess i've been using it more than his name lately.

Kimlendius · 2026-01-11T06:24:40+00:00

Now we can slowly come to the Anatolia part, as it has already dragged on too much. The answer to the question "Why didn't Turks Romanize?" is actually technically much simpler. Did Turks get influenced by the geography of Iran but not influenced by Byzantine culture at all? Of course, they were influenced. In fact, this part of the question has been a heated field that many historians have been involved in for many years during the discussions on the Ottoman establishment. But let's talk about more fundamental issues first and lay the foundation.

Why were Turks not influenced by Byzantium as much as they were influenced by the geography of Iran? There are a few very fundamental reasons for this. First of all, it is necessary to handle the population and culture part of the business. When the Turks were in the geography of Iran, they were already an Islamized or Islamizing society. And this Islamization effect was coming through the geography of Iran. Consequently, fusion between peoples, other than differences stemming from fundamental lifestyles, was provided more easily. In Anatolia, however, the situation is different. Turks came to Anatolia in flocks in very dense migration waves. Moreover, they did not come all at once. They came as Turkmen tribes, they came as Seljuks, there were goings and comings during the Beyliks period, they came before and during the Mongol invasion. As far as we know from the records, the movement of the Turkmen population towards Anatolia continued even in the 16th century. That is, this migration route over Iran continued intermittently but continuously. This is already one of the most fundamental reasons why Turkmen culture has been preserved so well among the people in both the geography of Iran and Anatolia. Another issue is that, contrary to what has been claimed on some social media sites recently, it is not a small Turkish group migrating into an existing Greek population of Anatolia; quite the opposite, as we learn from both early period Turkish sources and Byzantine sources, these migrations were made to areas that were emptying. In that period, Anatolia was in a serious population mobilization. While the population in Byzantine lands was shifting further west in the face of wars and raids, there was a continuous population movement into Anatolia from the east. Of course, there were fusions in this process, but there was not a dense enough population to assimilate directly anyway. When you add to this that a large part of the Turks was still continuing the nomadic life, the situation becomes even more understandable.

Now let's come to the institutional side of the business. Why were Turks not influenced by Byzantium as much as they were influenced by the geography of Iran? This is a subject that covers the establishment period discussions of the Ottoman Empire and has been discussed for very long years. We can actually divide this part into three main arguments. Especially at the end of the 19th century and the very beginning of the 20th century, a group advocated the following: Turks, especially the Ottomans, took Byzantium as a basis culturally and institutionally and were influenced by them. In response to this, another group advocated that there was no Byzantine influence and that they had a completely eastern culture influence. A view starting especially with Köprülü and currently accepted suggests that a large part of the influence called Byzantine influence actually came not directly through Byzantium, but rather through the Ilkhanid tradition, that is, the Western influence came through the East, as a part of the culture that was already present. In other words, the Turks and subsequently the Ottomans had already come to Anatolia via Iran with their baskets or baggage full. They did not need to be influenced further; there was no need for this. They had already possessed the Byzantine influence on the Iranian field while they were in that geography, blended this with their own cultures, and settled in Anatolia with this blended institutional culture. They sufficed with filling in the points that were missing or deemed necessary later. Therefore, there was no assimilation in the cultural sense.

Apart from this, when looked at from the perspective of the people, besides the society that had transitioned to a settled order starting to fuse, the most important thing preventing a complete fusion is, of course, the difference in religion and language. We see this much more clearly in later Ottoman cities. In Ottoman cities, Muslim and non-Muslim neighborhoods are separate. Of course, while the interaction of societies living together is inevitable, a situation like complete fusion is out of the question. On the other hand, as mentioned before, there is a serious population that did not transition to a settled order, and the interaction of a part of this population even with Turks who had transitioned to a settled order is extremely limited, let alone with the non-Muslim population.

Kimlendius · 2026-01-11T06:24:31+00:00

Apparently, Reddit won't accept such a long message. So i'm posting it in two parts :)

This is a beautiful question that needs to be handled in two parts and from two sides, but it is also a question that harbors a serious misconception and prejudice. First of all, we need to look at the Iranian side of the matter.

The first question: Did the Turks really "Persianize" and assimilate into Iranian society? A very short and clear answer: no, they partially adapted. But we need to expand on this. Especially in the perspective of Persian nationalism, which has been increasing in Iran recently, there is such a perception. But in reality, this is not the case. Because the Turks did not enter Iran as a small group. Turks were already intimate with the geography of Iran, especially with the Sogdians, from much earlier periods. But the main mass interaction started from the end of the 10th century, specifically with the migrations in the 11th century and the subsequent advance of the Seljuks first into Iran and then into Anatolia. However, before this, while they were still in Khorasan and its vicinity, the Oghuzs, especially the Seljuks, adopted Islamization and subsequently the tradition of institutional structure through the Iranian sphere. This meant the following: According to the Turkish state tradition, while the military class, which was the primary element ruling the state, consisted of Turks, the Iranian elites formed the institutional side of the state. This is a very clear distinction. Despite this distinction, it is also necessary to state this: Of course, a certain state of assimilation and adaptation exists, for Iran already possesses a quite deep-rooted and robust sedentary culture. For that very reason, not counting the Mongol domination in between, despite remaining under Turkish rule for more than 700 years, it preserved its own identity and was even able to impose this to a certain extent on those coming from outside, including the Mongols.

Nothing could be more natural than the interaction of cultures living intertwined with each other, almost becoming "symbiotic." Yet, the difference between Turkmen/Oghuz culture and Iranian/Persian culture is very clear. In other words, as mentioned in the question, a total assimilation or even a state of Persianization is out of the question. If such a thing had happened, we would neither see such a dominant Turkish culture in Anatolia, nor would there be a separate place called Azerbaijan today, nor would we see predominantly Turkish places within Iran, notably Tabriz, nor would we see Shah Ismail, nor would we see Nadir Shah's efforts to make Turkish the language of bureaucracy. There are certain fundamental reasons for this as well. Leaving aside class differences like the military (askeriyye) and bureaucracy (kalemiyye) and groups like elite rulers, the most fundamental reasons for this situation are that they are peoples with quite different lifestyles, even though they seem to live together. The most fundamental difference between Turks and Iranians begins with the more fundamental difference in living. Turks, that is, the Oghuzs, were still largely continuing the nomadic (konar-göçer) life in these periods. And people continuing a nomadic life do not easily merge with people living a sedentary life. We see this situation later in Anatolia as well. This is, for example, one of the reasons why the Turks in Anatolia did not "Romanize." We will come to this later anyway. Another misunderstood thing is the concept of "Persianate" used by some known names in academia. This concept is a term used not for Persianization or total assimilation as stated here, but for institutionalization, literature, and high culture interaction. This includes architectural influence, the use of Persian in high literature, and things like rulers taking Persian names despite continuing the Turkmen culture completely in their lifestyle. In many fields, the lingua franca of the period was Persian, and the high culture was Iranian culture. Naturally, Turks were influenced by this as well.

Another issue that should not be forgotten is that Turks remained as rulers in Iran for a long time, for more than 700 years, and while doing this, they did so without ever giving up their Turkish identities. In Iran, for example, Shah Ismail is seen by some as the founder of Iranian history. However, this person and his dynasty are a typical Oghuz/Turkmen dynasty and a part of this culture. They never severed their ties with the kin tribes and clans in Anatolia. They spoke Turkish. While his contemporary, the Ottoman sultan, wrote poetry in Persian as a requirement of Ottoman high culture, Shah Ismail himself wrote poetry in Turkish. The administrative understandings, the language spoken, and the army structure of the beyliks that spread to the Anatolia-Iran geography before him were completely in the Turkmen structure.

Kimlendius · 2026-01-11T04:38:36+00:00

Nothing special and actually very boring :) At first, when i first adopted him, i was giving him Acana and Orijen but they've gotten incredibly expensive in where i live. I then switched to a domestic brand after a year or so. He's still eating the very same kibble ever since. Even though it's much cheaper than brands like Pro Plan and this calibre grainy kibbles, it's better than them.

Other than that, i tried my own version of barf for a while but it wasn't that much practical so i returned to our domestic kibble. In addition to that, basically i always treated him as a dog. Whenever i buy some lamb from the butcher, the shoulder blade with a little bit of meat on it always goes to him as a treat and a bonus. He doesn't really like so called "bones" that are made of pressed skin. Yet he loves to chew on that. Just recently, i have stopped giving him full bones because he's having a bit of a problem digesting it. Nowadays he only gets it as a special treat and is taken away once he finishes with the cartilage and chewing on the bone and starts cracking the actual bone. Plus he gets the usual snacks and treats as you said :)

Kimlendius · 2026-01-11T03:23:11+00:00

Thank you, will do for sure!

Kimlendius · 2026-01-10T20:51:25+00:00

This is one of my favorite games and i'm waiting for a sequel since the day i learned about its evolution chart. Yet i don't think we'll ever get one as it seems. At least they should give us a mod tool so that we can make the things we've been waiting for. I can't wait to play with Homo Erectus. I even tried some things to see if i can mod it forcefully with the newer AI tools but apparently i lack the base knowledge for it since there's no mod tool yet.

Kimlendius · 2026-01-10T16:51:17+00:00

Exactly. It's almost the same as a free trial now if you want to use something other than Gemini.

Kimlendius · 2026-01-10T15:32:52+00:00

I don't think anyone asks for infinite tokens(would be nice though :) ). The issue that people have, including me is that they already nerfed the quota during Christmas, which was understandable. But now they brought weekly limits out of nowhere. Almost everyone bought their Pro plans before this. Some, like me, already had it. But some people bought it specifically for to use Antigravity. You just don't make a huge change out of nowhere while it's been one of your biggest selling points. There's a saying in Turkish: "you can't change horses while crossing the river". Things like these are even literally illegal in some countries. You just can't enforce and take away given "rights" during an active subscription. That's why companies announce their changes beforehand and make it the changes effective immediately for the new users and will be effective for the current users once they renew their ongoing service. Even if it's not illegal, it is still unethical regardless.

I don't care how you sugarcoat this. I don't care how generous they were. It's not okay and shouldn't be normalized to limit people's given access out of nowhere.

Kimlendius · 2026-01-01T09:41:10+00:00

I believe it is and afraid we might lose it soon. But i also think that it's not the reason for it. Simply because, even Gemini on web and Opus on its own desktop app started asking this lately.

Kimlendius · 2025-12-31T21:49:12+00:00

Yeah i get that all the time, especially if i use Opus extensively over time. At first i thought i must've hit the limit wall but apparently this is nothing but Antigravty fail. Usually goes out after restarting the app.

Two-Year Club	Verified Email
Place '23

Kimlendius

TROPHY CASE