I think there was a Bellaquin mention but I can't recall where it is from. I'm guessing Atlas is just staying far away from all of the trademarks held by other companies. Makes sense. It's unfortunate though since Doissetep and Mistridge are phenomenal. But with Castra Solis in Provencal, almost on top of the old Doissetep location, its likely to be changed in the future.
I should note that Vardian's Tomb (Rome Tribunal) is discussed in Ancient Magics and reads much like the original version.
I make no secret that ultimately I would like to revise the Levant for 5th edition.
I'm a huge fan of Niall's work / B&S but much of it has been superceded by 5th edition now (Mythic Islam in RoP:D, Sahir and Jinn in tCatC, the boundaries of the tribunal have changed greatly etc).
The main obstructing issue would be dealing with the sahir alchemists of Damascus / the Storytelling sahir of the Bedouin and the Jinn without reproducing the whole sahir ruleset or invalidating tCatC.
I'm working towards several Sub Rosa articles in the interim.
One can dream, eh?
Regards,
Lachie
That would be a good choice
..and R: Voice has been rahter completely integrated into hermetic theory 
I'd love to see Cyprus given a whole chapter.
It would be very tricky to balance a new Levant book with tCatC material, but as long as it focused on flavor rather than details I think it could be done with minimal repetition. Some background explanation of sahir and Jinn would be necessary, but as long as they aren't brought front and center the lack of mechanics shouldn't be crippling.
There has been a lot of discussing recently on the inter-connectedness of Ars books, but thus far I think the tribunal books have handled this well. For example, the only RoP books I own are Magic and Faerie, but when reading Sundered Eagle I felt like I got a good grasp of the Divine and Infernal landscape of the tribunal. I would have problems with the mechanics if I wanted to delve into these realms, but then the intent of a tribunal book isn't mechanics. Likewise, I think a new Levant book could dedicate a chapter (large or small) to the sahir that is mostly about where they are and what they're up to, without bothering too much on their abilities. Unfortunately this would leave a gap on the subject of Hermetic/Sahir duels or combat (come to think of it, I can't even remember what "combat" magic sahirs have and most of my Ars books are boxed for shipping at the moment).
Doissetep is mentioned on p.72 of Guardians of the Forest, as the place where Imanitos Mendax of Oculus Septentrionalis was apprenticed.
See the errata 
You know, if I were Atlas I'd do the same with the Order of Hermes and House Tremere. Cleaning out foreign trademarks seems like a good idea.
Count me in as one of the vocal minority to redo Iberia...without tossing out the Infernalism.
The problem I had with the 3rd Ed Iberia book wasn't all the Infernalism. It was how cleanly the world responded to the Infernal threat. I think it'd be really interesting to move the Iberia setting forward to 1221, keep the Shadow Flambeau, but treat their discovery and the OoH's response with....shall we say, a "more modern response."
Let's see a Tribunal where accusations of Infernalism and Shadow Flambeau involvement get thrown across every bargaining table. Where strange bedfellows are made at the foot of a burning pyre because someone used Infernal accusations as a political manuever. Let's see the end of the Reconquista interrupted by the suddenly inescapable fact that the Order of Hermes is actually completely impotent in the face of real demons, even if they could stop bickering amongst themselves long enough to face the danger.
Oh, I'm sorry, were you have a religious war? It's only that some demons are ramaging across the continent, and we could probably use a little help...
That's my vote.
Ibearia was a work of art, and I would cringe to see it being tinkered with. The best part of the book, Reculed/Flambeau's history, was retconned out of existence. A new Iberia book would be like rubbing salt into an old wound.
And note that the Infernal bits were not penned by Peter Henteges (the inventor/creator of the original Flambeau and author of Iberia). There were a lot of icky creepy things inserted by Cliff (whateverhisnamewas), the editor for WW/ArM3 back in the day. I just read the book with a WWisms filter, and it is simply fantastic. But still, a bit of Infernal as a plot device can be fun. Just dial the devil's volume in that book down from 11 to a 3.
I know I am in the minority here, but I would prefer it if they never updated the Provincial Tribunal or Stonehenge for 5th edition. I don't care which one they don't update, but I would like one tribunal that is reserved for campaigns to make of what they will..
All of the 5th edition tribunal books have been good reads, but they have all presented tribunals with decided quirks in how they are run. None of them really fit what I consider to presented as normal tribunal in the main rulebook and Covenants or the other 5th edition work. From some magi having multiple votes in the Rhine Tribunal along with all of the guild politics, to allowing people to rob you of mundane items in the Normandy Tribunal, to all of the strangeness regarding the Tribunal of Thebes...well, all seem like nice places for players to visit but not to start a standard covenant in.
The other tribunals have their own peculiarities which make keeping them as a reserve less satisfying. If you are running a campaign in Iberia, the reconquista is going to be a feature. If you are in the Hiberian Tribunal, faeries are going to be a feature. Whereas right now, a campaign set in Provincial Tribunal can focus on ordinary hermetic things
Ah, but then there's the recent Albigensian Crusade and the Cathars isn't there... 
ArM5 is set in 1220, whereas the ArM3 books based in Provence were set earlier, before the start of the so-called Cathar war.
Lachie
I'd be totally down with a new Iberia book, but I agree with Timothy, in that I'd love a new, supersized Roman Tribunal book. We could hit double length on that bad boy without even trying.
-Ben.
I think the idea of leaving one Tribunal untouched in 5e is a good idea. I think the Alps Tribunal is the one to leave alone. Stonehenge generates too much interest not to cover, and it would be odd to detail Normandy and Iberia while leaving the space between them a blank slate. Provencal also has, as mentioned, some exciting mundane politics going on, that I'd love to see detailed for Mythic Europe, and at the same time, is probably the least "odd," the closest to the "hermetic norm." It also has some noteworthy covenants, including house HQ's
The Alps, while at the center of Europe, is pretty isolated, and has less dramatic mundane political changes occuring. Seems like a good place to let GM's imaginations run wild.
Stonehenge is pseudo-5th edition already. It is edition-less in design, since it contains no statistics at all, and David Chart has mentioned it being designed (by himself) to be compatible with 5th edition already. I doubt it will change. For me it is the vanilla setting for the game right now. I was disappointed that the war on Davnalleus had so little mention in it, but hey.
I also dislike the tribunals running some wild stuff that break the description in the core book as well. The Lion and the Lily was the extreme case for me. Being deprived of magical power not being a crime was too much to swallow, since it puts the Order of Hermes at the same level as petty bandits and street urchins to me and breaks the whole concept of why the hell you agree to the oath of Hermes at all. Other tribunals are less extreme, and I think guardians of the forests is OK-ish in that sense (the guilds are basically political positions on large themes, something bound to develop even in a political system like the one in the OoH), but I also like the core design better. The main issue I have is that so far the tribunals published for 5th edition make the core book lie to the players, since tribunals are not what the core book says they are. And this is not good.
I look forward to Hibernia and Provençal being covered, but hope they are quite basic core book when it comes to hermetic stuff. For being redone, Rome and Iberia are always good. Pitty the story on Flambeau now it has been toned down from "level 10 epic awesomeness" to "level 2 yawn-boring mundane-ish" but hey. I prefered him being a flamboyant trigger-happy firebrand.
Xavi
Let's be clear, in the Normandy Tribunal it is still a crime to be deprived of your magical power. However, that Tribunal makes an extremely narrow interpretation of what is magical power. Lab equipment, vis, books on magic, and other items that are required for the practice of magic. Food and grogs, not so much. The ruling is "the mundane resources of a covenant cannot be considered to contribute towards the magical power of its members." This is much like a bad US Supreme Court decision establishing precedent which is difficult to overturn by later Courts. Yes, without income you cannot buy lab equipment, that's true, but that's not a matter of law for the Normandy Tribunal. The fact is that the income has not been converted to lab equipment or other necessary sundries, and so therefore until it does so it is a legitimate target of raiding in the Tribunal. Yes, it's reprehensible, but, IMO, that is an area rich for stories to be mined. Don't like the law? Change it. Stories ensue.
+1
Aspects of Tribunals which encourage stories are good, in my opinion. I like the need for Hermetic sponsorship in Rhine, or the Fae/Magical sponsors of Thebes, or the Resource "sponsorship" of Normandy, because they drive magi to stories about establishing the covenant. Something the players had to build and fight for is always cherished more than something they simply received.
-Ben.
I guess this is one of those areas of "not the kind of stories that we consider worth running" thing.
Cheers,
Xavi
Sure, but to be fair, I think your characterization of the Normandy Tribunal is a bit excessive. And if you don't like to run those kinds of stories, you can come up with any number of reasons why they wouldn't happen to your covenant, or wouldn't happen in your version of the Tribunal. Take any Tribunal book that describes a system of governance, and I can probably come up with a way that they deny magi of their magical power. Or don't. There's a reason that the Code is so vague, it's like a constitution...
I did not like the whole system of governance of the Normandy tribunal, not just that bit. The competition to get vis et al did not fit with my vision of the Order of Hermes and instead looked like "hermetics turned mundane bullies" to me. That is at odds with my vision of the Order. I have played a saga in Normandy where the mundane problems (constant warfare in the borders between the 2 rulers of the land, basically) screwed up a lot of stuff, but the Order of Hermes was much more noble than what it appears to be in Normandy as per the canon material. I did not like that approach. That is a personal impression, but it is like the 5th edition Criamons: I just cannot swallow that myself. It can even make sense from a historical perspective, but it just throws my (very personal) suspension of disbelief out of the window. It is one of the few Ars books I have read once and not opened ever again. it is not the kind of environment me and my troupe would enjoy playing in. That is not a problem it is only that each troupe is a different world, and each saga a different animal. We do not like to eat that kind of dish.
The code is easy enough to break. You can easily ensure that vital information reaches the ears of the adequate people to ensure a crusader army attacks a covenant without getting your hands dirty or be untraceable, for example. You can always point out through indirect means that a magus murdered a mundane to the overlord of said mundane (and the overlord might be the Pope and the murdered mundane an archbishop or cardinal). There are thousands of ways to pass over it. I dislike it being so blatant, I guess.
Each one of us has his own preferences 
Mine do not fit well with the Order (or lack of it) as it is found in the Normandy tribunal book.
Xavi
I have to agree with Xavi on this one. Normandy seems so far out of line with other tribunals that I wonder how it continues to exist as an independant political entity. Yeah, yeah, story material. I myself prefer being given story ideas or seeds rather than having them foisted upon me. As for the retort that I can play or rearrange it as I see fit, that is simply unworkable. Unless I am just playing with myself (uncomfortable allusion intended 
), I have to take into account the expectations and preconceptions of others. Which are based on what's printed cannon. You can't fight cannon. As an SG, you gotta compromise with the players. As a player or just one voice in a troupe, you are stuck with the whims of the majority.
The Hermetic banditry of L&L, and other such deviations from Hermetic norm, should be presented as story ideas (which may fit in any tribunal) as opposed to a nailed down chamber pot.