• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.

Tinto Maps #1 - 10th of May 2024

Hello everybody, and welcome to the first post of Tinto Maps! This is a new weekly series that we will be running about the top-secret game Project Caesar.

Let me introduce myself before I continue, as some of you may get to know me from the development of the latest EUIV DLCs, but I might not be as well-known to everyone as Johan. I’m Pavía, the Content Design Lead at Paradox Tinto, which I joined in 2021. Before becoming a videogame developer, my background was as a Historian, which led me to work on a PhD. in Medieval History (fool me!), which I finished in 2020. Besides that, I’ve spent several thousands of hours of my life playing Paradox GSGs since I discovered and started playing Europa Universalis 20 years ago, in 2004.

What this new series will be about is quite straightforward: each week I will be sharing with you maps of a new different region, so you have an outlook of them and we are able to receive early feedback (because as you may already know from Johan’s Tinto Talks, there is still a lot of WIP stuff ongoing).

About this feedback, we’d like you to take into account a couple of things. The first is that we’ve worked really hard to gather the best sources of information available to craft the best possible map; we used GIS tools with several layers of historical map sources from academic works, geographical data, administrative data, etc., to help us ensure the desired quality. So we would appreciate getting specific suggestions backed by these types of sources, as others (let’s say, a Wikipedia map or YouTube video with no references) may not be reliable enough. The second thing to comment on is that sometimes a certain decision we made was an interpretation over an unclear source, while sometimes we have just plainly made some errors when crafting the map (which on a 30,000 location map is a normal thing, I guess). I’ll let you know when any of these happen, and I’m also going to ask for your understanding when an error or bug is found and confirmed as such.

With those forewords said, let’s start with today’s region: the Low Countries! This is what the political map looks like:

Countries.png

The regional situation in 1337. The counties of Hainaut, Holland, and Zeeland are ruled by William of Avesnes, who is married to Joanna, daughter of Duke John III of Brabant. Another John, the Duke of Luxembourg, might be the strongest power, as he is also the King of Bohemia. The County of Flanders is the wealthiest country in the region, controlling such important cities as Brugge and Ghent. Up in the north, we have other interesting countries, such as the Bishopric of Utrecht or the Republic of Frisia (you might notice that we're using a dynamic custom country name for them, 'Frisian Freedom').

And here we have the locations:

Locations.png

We had a fun bug for some time - Antwerpen didn’t have any pixels connected to the sea, which we found because we couldn’t build any type of port building there. There’s a happy ending, as the bug has already been corrected, and Antwerpen can finally have a proper port!

Provinces:

Provinces.jpg


Terrain (Climate, Topography, and Vegetation):

Climate.jpg

Topography.jpg

Vegetation.jpg

We are aware that the Netherlands looked differently in the 14th century, as several land reclamations took place during the Late Medieval and Early Modern periods, but we are using a 20th-century version of the map for the sake of consistency. Most of the regions throughout the world would look quite different from nowadays, and documenting those changes (especially the coastline shapes) would be a non-trivial problem to resolve. As a side note, we already removed Flevoland from it, and have already identified some other modern ones that slipped through and we'll eventually remove them, as well.

Cultures:

Cultures.png

The stripes mean that there are pops of different culture inhabiting in those location. Also, the German and French cultures are WIP, we’ll show you a proper version on later Tinto Maps.

Religions:

Religions.png

Not many religions here yet, although there will be interesting religious stuff happening eventually…

Raw Goods:

Goods.png

Goods get regularly swapped around here and there to have a balance between geographical and historical accuracy, and gameplay purposes. So take this as the far-from-final current version of them.

And an additional map for this week:

Markets.png

We reinstated a Low Countries market centered on Antwerpen, after doing some balance tweaks that made it more viable.

And these are the maps for today! I hope that you have a nice weekend, and next Friday, we will travel down south, to Iberia!
 

Attachments

  • Climate.jpg
    Climate.jpg
    357,1 KB · Views: 0
  • Topography.jpg
    Topography.jpg
    402,8 KB · Views: 0
  • Vegetation.jpg
    Vegetation.jpg
    414,6 KB · Views: 0
Last edited:
  • 330Love
  • 125Like
  • 6
  • 3
  • 1Haha
  • 1
Reactions:
That’s pretty interesting, I’m from that area myself and always thought Sneek didn’t become bigger then Stavoren until around 1400-1450 (so definitely after 1337), the kinda ‘Golden Era’ of Sneek and that for most of the Middle Ages Stavoren was more relevant. But knowing the population estimates Sneek is definitively the most logical options for the location
It is interesting isn't it? I'm not from Friesland, and I don't know a lot about the history of southwestern Friesland, I just found this book in the libary, but even I thought that Stavoren would have been an important trading city for longer, but apparently not. I was also surprised at how small these cities actually were, as Sneek was actually the second biggest city in Friesland in (parts of) the sixteenth century according to the book. By the way, do you know what the economic niche Sneek mostly filled was? It wasn't a trading city was it?
 
Since I'm from Düren, I was going to complain about the umlaute, but others already did.

I think the geography of the area is all wrong though. The whole of Jülich is hills and forest - that's just bad. Just look at a topography map of the area, the highest elevations are man made ! The locations Düren, Bergheim should be flatlands. The parts of the area that are actually hilly (Northeifel) are represented well by the Scheiden part.

Interesting decision to have no location of Jülich itself as well. Was Düren biggern then Jülich at the time ?

Not sure about the process of deforestation at the exact time, but probably should be flatland or even farmland ( Jülicher Börde !). Maybe woods is more accurate at the exact time, but forest is just bad. The areas further south in the Eifel should be forest instead probably ?

Roermond to the north should be flat as well. Aachen is questionable, but probably okay to keep hilly. But forest again seems weird.

I'm wondering about the areas that are hills and grassland at the same time southwest of Aachen - seems a strange combination for the time.
 
It is interesting isn't it? I'm not from Friesland, and I don't know a lot about the history of southwestern Friesland, I just found this book in the libary, but even I thought that Stavoren would have been an important trading city for longer, but apparently not. I was also surprised at how small these cities actually were, as Sneek was actually the second biggest city in Friesland in (parts of) the sixteenth century according to the book. By the way, do you know what the economic niche Sneek mostly filled was? It wasn't a trading city was it?
Honestly the economic history of Frisian cities isn’t necessarily something I’m that familiar with. Sneek used to be located at the Middle Sea, a ‘sea’/big river connected to the North Sea, which silted closed during the high/later Middle Ages (around 1100-1300). From Sneek onwards canals were build to connect Sneek to the parts of the Middle Sea that remained longer so that might explain its trade relevance: it still had a sea connection.

Also, the simple fact that Sneek was one of the larger cities in the area and the only Frisian city with actual city walls and a moat around the city walls, making it extra safe, might have also helped with its economic value. But if you want better explanations, I would recommend looking up some sources yourself because this is just not my expertise, but I hope my limited knowledge still helped you somewhat
 
  • 1
Reactions:
I wonder if you can split locations or if they are static, since there are some towns and locations that seem like they should be added, like you could split off Haarlem from Amsterdam, or add Delft. But that is just my personal preference since I think adding more locations to Holland would better demonstrate the rural urban split that was prevalent in the Netherlands In the 17th century. Good job on the map!!!
 
What's the justification for having Dutch and Flemish cultures be separate in 1337? Obviously there's different dialects here and there but they are more related to one another than to for instance Low German, and I'm not sure there would have been a sharp distinction between a northern "Dutch" and a southern "Flemish" before modernity. Full disclaimer it's not like I'm an expert in the area, just wanted to ask.

Shouldn't Overjissel be Low German culture as well, given that that's the main language there?

A Picard culture is exciting though.
The distinction between Dutch and Flemish cultures in 1337 can be seen as somewhat anachronistic, given that the concept of national cultures was not fully developed in the medieval period.

That means while we can look back and make educated guesses we can't be sure. Could've been cousins fighting over power.
 
I don't understand why the locations and provinces are portrayed in this way for Holland, Utrecht and Zeeland.
When you have provinces in the game with up to 10 locations if I remember correctly why split up Holland in north and south?
north and south Holland are the modern provinces which is incorrect for the time period, also Utrecht was added to the province of north holland.
Utrecht should be a province of itself.
I must confess that I however do not have a solution yet for this, since I don't know what a good layout would be for the locations in Utrecht.

Holland was divided into different "baljuwschappen", baljuw translates to baillif, so basicly regions a baillif or someone with authority would be in charge for the count of Holland.
These baljuwschappen are known to be the following for Holland:
- Delfland
- Schieland
- Rijnland
- Kennemerland
- Zuid-Holland (yes this should be a location not a province)
- Amstelland
- Waterland
- West Friesland
- Gooiland (not sure about this one yet so I included this under Amstelland)

Here is a map of the baljuwschappen:

1716997717342.gif


Zuid-Holland and Amstelland are not included on this map but on some other sources they are.
This is because the region between Holland and Utrecht was very contested in this time period.

Map of the northern part of holland 1300
map of the middle part of holland in 1300
map of the southern part of holland in 1300

For Zeeland I really think we do not justice here to make it a single location, it should be a province of itself with a couple of locations.

map of Zeeland in 1300

So with these findings I made a first proposal of what I think is more accurate for the time period.


proposal locations.png


Some other nitpicks.

The population value in West-Friesland currently is way too low since the West-Frisians were able to field an army of around 2000-4000 men in the West-Frisian guerilla war.

Just so you can check your population count for Holland including Zeeland.
- Total population for Holland in 1300 was 260000 people
- Total population for Holland in 1345 was 290000 people

The province of Zeeland was known to produce salt, wool and it was considered a breadbasket in this time period.

I hope you will take this in consideration
 
Last edited:
  • 1Like
Reactions:
The location of Remscheid next to Düsseldorf in the County of Berg should be named Lennep. Remscheid became a city in 1808, while Lennep, today a part of Remscheid, received city rights in the 13th century. Lennep also had a wall! And later it became part of the Hanseatic League, because of its location at a trade and pilgrim route.
It's also hilly here. Today Remscheid's nickname is "Seestadt auf dem Berge" ("seaside town on the hill") because of the worldwide trade relations of its tool industry.
As a „Remscheider“ I do agree 100% with this. Remscheid barely existed at that time while Lennep was one of the most important cities in the area.

Wiki entry also mentions that the Lennep cloth industry grew stronger during the 14th century and became known beyond the region.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Like some others, I was concerned about the population figures which were, according to my knowledge of Dutch history, unrealistic. So I did some research on population figures and found some useful sources.

One source is a QGIS map of the Low Countries (1350-1800), which I believe will be –if not already in use– quite useful. The map was started in the 2020's and therefore one of the most up to date resources not only on population figures but also borders.
https: //datasets dot iisg.amsterdam/dataverse/recountingtheuncounted

The next is the blog of one of the historians working on this project: Rombert Stapel.
https: //rombertstapel dot com/

In the blog he provides maps and publications related to the GIS project. The most useful for population purposes were the following:
  • Stapel, R.J., ‘Een rekenoefening in drie akten. Bevolking, priesters en hun herkomst in het bisdom Utrecht (begin zestiende eeuw)’, in: H. van Engen, H. Nijdam and K. van Vliet eds., Macht, bezit en ruimte. Opstellen over de noordelijke Nederlanden in de middeleeuwen(Hilversum: Verloren 2021) 471–487.
    • A table of the population is on page 475.
  • Oostindiër, A.E., and R.J. Stapel, ‘Demographic Shifts and the Politics of Taxation in the Making of Fifteenth-Century Brabant’, in: M.J.M. Damen and K. Overlaet eds., Constructing and Representing Territory in Late Medieval and Early Modern Europe (Amsterdam: AUP 2022) 141–178.
The accompanying blogposts:
https: //rombertstapel dot com/2021/10/een-rekenoefening-in-drie-akten/
https: //rombertstapel dot com/2021/12/demographic-shifts-and-the-politics-of-taxation/

A population table comparing the Tinto figures with the estimations of the publication:
Screenshot 2024-06-01 at 13.22.52.png
Low-Countries-1500-scaled.jpg

For the borders of Cleves in the publication I assumed the borders from the GIS map ca. 1500 provided on the blog.

On the blogposts (also included as lower quality images in the publications) I found the following maps:
Screenshot 2024-06-01 at 13.45.25.png
combined-Figure-5.2a-b.png
Screenshot 2024-06-01 at 13.45.49.png

The names of the cities added on the 1374 Brabant map are my addition based on another map made by Stapel.

As the dates for the population figures differ nearly 150 years, I had to take into account potential population growth/decline. However, as the fifteenth century is a period of stagnation after the black death, and population numbers would only rise above the pre-plague levels around the start of the sixteenth century, (generally the date for the estimates), I assumed that these figures must be fairly similar. Of course since I did not handle the QGIS data, maybe the following guessing is not needed and the 1350 estimates are already included within the data.

The main conclusions I took from the table, were that the locations in Drenthe, Overijssel and Gelre were too populous, while the locations in Groningen en Friesland were too low. The amounts differ too much between the publication and the Tinto Talks to be reasonable. I am quite confident in these conclusions.

The situation in Holland, Flanders and Brabant is different. Holland and especially Brabant had seen a rise in significance in the sixteenth century relative to the fourteenth century so a population level somewhat lower than in the sixteenth century is in my opinion reasonable. However, I do believe that the population from the Tinto Talks is on the low end and that a slight raise is fair. Flanders on the other hand experienced its economic zenith not during the fifteenth but during the preceding centuries. As the figure from Tinto Talks is lower I think that a higher population level than the 1469 figure is warranted, especially since the start date is before the start of the black death.

However this was not my main problem with the population figures, but rather the population distribution within the provinces. I thought that, pre-industrialisation, the parts of the Netherlands with a sandy soil were the poorest and least densely populated. The clay, peat and löss grounds on the other hand were much more fertile and therefore densely populated. The population map from the Tinto Talks shows a too high population number for the sandy regions in Drenthe, Oversticht, Gelre, Brabant and the uncultivated peatlands in Friesland, while the numbers on fertile clays in (North-)Holland, Friesland and Groningen are too low. Based on the density map and the following soil map I think my worries about the population distribution were correct:
Screenshot 2024-05-31 at 21.08.38.png


The Brabant numbers can be inferred from the map of Brabant in 1378 which shows that Eindhoven and Helmond were insignificant during the start of the game and would only later rise to prominence and also shows that Breda is grossly overrepresented.

As sand was the least fertile soil of the Netherlands, and the fact that much of the area of West-Brabant was uncultivated, I think that Farmlands in Breda, but not in the many other much more fertile parts of the Netherlands should be revised.

I think this split of the Netherlands in four geographical parts is best resolved with a change in topography and vegetation where:
Peatlands = Marsh + Grassland
Clay = Marsh + Farmland
Löss = Flatlands/Hills + Farmland (These two soils were the earliest developed and the most densely populated)
Sand = Flatlands + Woods/Sparse (deforestation was quite a big issue in some parts)

Thank you to anyone willing to read this (very) long post! I hope some of the info I provided is useful.
 
  • 1Like
  • 1
Reactions:
I'm wondering if it wouldn't be a good idea to sub-divide the climate even more than what you have to make it more regionally significant.. I imagen that winters in belarus and Russia are way more severe than in Hungary or Bohemia, and yet they are all just categorized as "continental".. I hope that climates have meaningful impact on the game, so have you considered making it more detailed?
 
I don't understand why the locations and provinces are portrayed in this way for Holland, Utrecht and Zeeland.
When you have provinces in the game with up to 10 locations if I remember correctly why split up Holland in north and south?
north and south Holland are the modern provinces which is incorrect for the time period, also Utrecht was added to the province of north holland.
Utrecht should be a province of itself.
I must confess that I however do not have a solution yet for this, since I don't know what a good layout would be for the locations in Utrecht.

Holland was divided into different "baljuwschappen", baljuw translates to baillif, so basicly regions a baillif or someone with authority would be in charge for the count of Holland.
These baljuwschappen are known to be the following for Holland:
- Delfland
- Schieland
- Rijnland
- Kennemerland
- Zuid-Holland (yes this should be a location not a province)
- Amstelland
- Waterland
- West Friesland
- Gooiland (not sure about this one yet so I included this under Amstelland)

Here is a map of the baljuwschappen:

View attachment 1140195

Zuid-Holland and Amstelland are not included on this map but on some other sources they are.
This is because the region between Holland and Utrecht was very contested in this time period.

Map of the northern part of holland 1300
map of the middle part of holland in 1300
map of the southern part of holland in 1300

For Zeeland I really think we do not justice here to make it a single location, it should be a province of itself with a couple of locations.

map of Zeeland in 1300

So with these findings I made a first proposal of what I think is more accurate for the time period.


View attachment 1140229

Some other nitpicks.

The population value in West-Friesland currently is way too low since the West-Frisians were able to field an army of around 2000-4000 men in the West-Frisian guerilla war.

Just so you can check your population count for Holland including Zeeland.
- Total population for Holland in 1300 was 260000 people
- Total population for Holland in 1345 was 290000 people

The province of Zeeland was known to produce salt, wool and it was considered a breadbasket in this time period.

I hope you will take this in consideration
Your number 10 location is the center of the madder (meekrap) production (even bigger than the Brugge location), so using dyes for that location is at least required.