Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

Regions of medieval Europe

Jump to latest Follow Reply
  • 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.
w_mullender said:
Together with what Alfihar already said about the low countries, some minor comments:
-Utrecht you may want to call "Sticht", which is the name of the region/county, Utrecht is the name of the bishopric which ruled it.
-Deventer I would call Oversticht. Deventer is just the main city during the Hanze days, while the area itself was semi-ruled (officially he was the lord, but due to the area in between his influence was very limited at times) by the bishop of Utrecht.
-Geldern and Zutphen (blue 5 and 7) dont sound right to me. 7 is definately Geldern, 5 looks like Limburg (both were counties)
Click to expand...

Low Countries
7 is definitely not Geldern but Gelre, there is a difference.
6 is Geldern but could also be Nijmegen.
5 Limburg

7 Is in reality 3 parts, the south western thing is the Betuwe, the eastern thing is the county of Zutphen ( :) ) and the centre is the Veluwe.
All these 3 areas became at some moment in the hands of the counts of Geldern, who became dukes of Gelre 1335 or something. But f.e. the county of Zutphen was not part of the duchy of Gelre, but instead it was a personal union, the ruler was the same guy. The dutch name Gelre comes from the german county Geldern.

6 Geldern is the name were the dynastie came from, it was county in what is now Germany and part of the Netherlands (area around the town of Roermond on the Meuse river).

5 Is Limburg, which as a county and a duchy later on.
 
It's a nice map, but the differences between region sizes is just huge at some points. Compare for example Bohemia to the most. If it's intended to be useful for a game, vast size discrepancies are not that good.
 
It is intended to display all the territories as they were in reality...

and the map is not meant for a game, it is meant to serve as source for games.

Bohemia was that large, there were no compact counties inside, just small distristcs (even smaller than english shires or hungarisn districts)

to the Gelre problem:
5 definitely isn't Limburg, Limburg is 4 Limburg was as far as I know a county that for some period belonged to Luxembourg.
The other changes I will check and them put them on, thanks... ;)

Later I will put rivers and possibly also cities on the map so it will be clearer what is what.
 
w_mullender said:
Together with what Alfihar already said about the low countries, some minor comments:
-Utrecht you may want to call "Sticht", which is the name of the region/county, Utrecht is the name of the bishopric which ruled it.
-Deventer I would call Oversticht. Deventer is just the main city during the Hanze days, while the area itself was semi-ruled (officially he was the lord, but due to the area in between his influence was very limited at times) by the bishop of Utrecht.
-Geldern and Zutphen (blue 5 and 7) dont sound right to me. 7 is definately Geldern, 5 looks like Limburg (both were counties)
Click to expand...
thanks

Was it called "Sticht" and "Oversticht" also in the middle ages or is it only modern name?
 
elvain said:
thanks

Was it called "Sticht" and "Oversticht" also in the middle ages or is it only modern name?
Click to expand...

Sticht and Oversticht are the ancient names, the modern names are

Ancient Modern
Sticht = Utrecht

Oversticht northern part = Drenthe
Oversticht southern part = Overijssel
 
Veldmaarschalk said:
Sticht and Oversticht are the ancient names, the modern names are

Ancient Modern
Sticht = Utrecht

Oversticht northern part = Drenthe
Oversticht southern part = Overijssel
Click to expand...
btw, how ancient and how modern the names are? do you know at least century when the ancient names turned to the modern ones?

thanks
 
That is hard to say, Sticht was used during the whole midle ages I guess.

The name Drenthe for the northern part of Oversticht is also an ancient name it was in use before there was a region called 'Oversticht' but the historical names Sticht (or Nedersticht = Lower Sticht) and Oversticht (= Upper Sticht) would be the best ones.

The name changes would most likely have happend in the 16th century, when the catholic bishop of Utrecht (the ruler of Sticht and Oversticht) lost its bishopric because of the reformation, but I am not 100% sure of this.

But the name change could also have happend a century earlier when the low countries becampe part of the Burgundians.
 
Veldmaarschalk said:
That is hard to say, Sticht was used during the whole midle ages I guess.

The name Drenthe for the northern part of Oversticht is also an ancient name it was in use before there was a region called 'Oversticht' but the historical names Sticht (or Nedersticht = Lower Sticht) and Oversticht (= Upper Sticht) would be the best ones.

The name changes would most likely have happend in the 16th century, when the catholic bishop of Utrecht (the ruler of Sticht and Oversticht) lost its bishopric because of the reformation, but I am not 100% sure of this.

But the name change could also have happend a century earlier when the low countries becampe part of the Burgundians.
Click to expand...
I asked because according to this map below , the names (and regions) already existed in 1477.
Map-1477_Low_Countries.png

Taken from this page.
 
elvain said:
btw, how ancient and how modern the names are? do you know at least century when the ancient names turned to the modern ones?

thanks
Click to expand...
Sticht is still in use to describe the area sometimes, eg I am a member of the Stichts Gooise Chessfederation.

The best way to look at (Over)sticht is to see it as areas and not as counties. Both as a whole fell under the bishop of Utrecht, but Oversticht was more or less independantly (depending on the exact time) ruled by feudal lords who were vassal of the bishop (Eg the lords of Coevorden were acting so independantly that the feudal levy was sent in a couple of times with mixed results). You may want to check this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bishops_of_Utrecht

Also note that Friesland was not ruled by a lord, though sometimes it had a nominal lord. Only around 1490 it became a county.
 
w_mullender said:
Sticht is still in use to describe the area sometimes, eg I am a member of the Stichts Gooise Chessfederation.

The best way to look at (Over)sticht is to see it as areas and not as counties. Both as a whole fell under the bishop of Utrecht, but Oversticht was more or less independantly (depending on the exact time) ruled by feudal lords who were vassal of the bishop (Eg the lords of Coevorden were acting so independantly that the feudal levy was sent in a couple of times with mixed results). You may want to check this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bishops_of_Utrecht

Also note that Friesland was not ruled by a lord, though sometimes it had a nominal lord. Only around 1490 it became a county.
Click to expand...
1) thanks for the info... it's great you save me time of searchand give me exact info and links. Thanks a lot ;)

2) Friesland. So who ruled there then? :confused:
 
elvain said:
2) Friesland. So who ruled there then? :confused:
Click to expand...
Perhaps they were an anarcho-syndicalist commune?

montypython1.jpg




Seriously though... From Regnal Chronolgies:
No central authority was present, and the land descended to purely local levels of control; the two contending factions were the Schieringen (Greylings ?), led by local Cistercian monasteries, and the Vetkopers (Fat-buyers), led by local Praemonstratian monasteries. In effect, the region was controlled for more than 300 years by local free cities (Sneek = Schiering, Leeuwarden = Vetkoper, etc.) and a crazy-quilt of rural territories belonging to various monastic orders. This state of affairs endured until the region was militarily subdued by Imperial troops under Albert of Saxe-Meissen at the end of the 15th century.
Click to expand...
http://www.hostkingdom.net/netherl.html#Frisia
 
Havard is closer to the truth, then he might have anticipated with his grail reference. Basically it was an area of free farmers (compare with the Germanic tribes), some monasteries and "cities". Even the Frisians in the north of Holland (West-Friesland) werent really ruled by the count of Holland, though he could call himself ruwaard (no translation afaik) there.

The Schieringers and Vetkopers dispute is from about the 13th century onwards and later coincides with the cod and hook disputes in the county of Holland.
 
Raczynski said:
Opava should be a part of (Lower) Silesia and not Moravia
Click to expand...
Originaly Opava was part of Moravia, it became separate duchy subordinated to king of Bophemia when Přemysl Otakar II. granted it to his ilegitimate son Mikuláš (Opavský=of Opava) in 3rd quater of 13th century

Then during 14th and 15th century it was more and more free principality that in 15th century became part of Silesia. But geographicaly it belongs to Upper Silesia, not Lower

On my map it is sub-region of Moravia, such as Salzburg is sub-region of Bavaria. That means those sub-regions were originaly part of the region (Moravia in case of Opava, Bavaria in case of Salzburg) but later they were more or less independent (or were understood as parts of another region)
 
here's actual stage of development:



anyone could help me with Norway?
I know there should be regions like Bergenhus, Akrershus, Trondelag and some other, but I don't know their medieval borders :(
 
Hmm, Småland could be split in to three provinces; Jönköping, Kronoberg, Kalmar
Småland were first created in 1679-1680, before that were Småland three provinces. And before 17th century were Småland 12 small chiefdoms.

I have tried to find some maps about norway for you but i coulden't find anything!

This link can maybe be to some help for you!
Old Maps!
 
Last edited:
elvain said:
anyone could help me with Norway?
I know there should be regions like Bergenhus, Akrershus, Trondelag and some other, but I don't know their medieval borders :(
Click to expand...
Bergenhus and Akershus are later names on administrative entities. It depends on what you want: Before, say, 1500, there are the old Norwegian regions. Some of these are rather small, others quite large in area. From 1500 on there is an evolution towards fewer, larger entities (this is where Akershus and Bergenhus comes in)...
 
New EU3 map... Hungary, the kingdom where sun never sets...
 
Krantz said:
Hmm, Småland could be split in to three provinces; Jönköping, Kronoberg, Kalmar
Småland were first created in 1679-1680, before that were Småland three provinces. And before 17th century were Småland 12 small chiefdoms.

I have tried to find some maps about norway for you but i coulden't find anything!

This link can maybe be to some help for you!
Old Maps!
Click to expand...
thanks.
I based Sweden mostly on these 3 maps:
Sweden1
Sweden2
Hanseatic league

On all of them Småland is one region. The time period of this map is 1000-1500
Havard said:
Bergenhus and Akershus are later names on administrative entities. It depends on what you want: Before, say, 1500, there are the old Norwegian regions. Some of these are rather small, others quite large in area. From 1500 on there is an evolution towards fewer, larger entities (this is where Akershus and Bergenhus comes in)...
Click to expand...
do you know about any list of the regions. I couldn't find it. Wikipedia gives me only modern administrative division and sites with historical maps mostly forget to show Norway
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back