• 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.
Hit a slight problem with the DVIP... I get a crash when I go up the family tree of some characters. No idea yet what causes it, but I'll either fix it or unlink (remove) the characters before I can release it.

@Jinnai: good catch! Will be edited or removed.
 
In regards to Scots Gaelic...

Can you tell me which provinces you would wish to make 'Anglo-Saxon'..... I expect Lothian, but any others? Also, what characters would you make Anglo-Saxon?

Option C was:

Irish Gaelic (Irish)
Scottish Gaelic (Scottish)
Use Anglo-Saxon for lowlander Scots?
 
Okay, regardless of B (merged gaelic/irish + scottish), or C (highlander + merged lowlander/saxon) this Scotland province setup for 1066 should afaik be correct:

Highlander:
Sutherland
Ross
Moray
Argyll
Buchan

Undecided (Highlander?):
Mar
Angus
Atholl

Lowlander:
Fife
Strathclyde
Lothian
Carrick
Galloway
Berwick

Norwegian:
Caithness
Cumberland

I'm not certain about Lowlander vs Highlander for Mar, Angus, & Atholl, these might go either way depending on which population is represented (town or country).

I'm thinking of making all the Scots lords "Highlander", except Galloway. Cumberland of course was ruled by a Saxon exile at the time, so he will remain Saxon no matter what.
I will obviously need a highlander and lowlander Scots name list, and correct versions of the names for these lords and dynasties, e.g. Malcolm -> Máel Coluim, Donald -> Donnchad, MacDonald -> Mac Dhomhnuill, MacKenzie -> Mac Coinneach, etc..


For the later scenarios the Scottish lords will become lowlander Scots where applicable. I am not sure yet what to do about the Scottish Merger Pot event though (which changes norwegian to scottish).


For scenario C, I might change the displayed name for the 'saxon' tag to Englisc, the contemporary name for the Old English (Anglo-Saxon) language. For scenario B, the 'irish' tag will become Gaelic.
 
Last edited:
Wikipedia's History of Scotland

When Edgar died in 1107, Margaret's third son Alexander became king, and when he in turn died in 1124, the crown passed to her fourth son David I. During David's reign Lowland Scots (known as Inglis then) began to grow in south east Scotland, although Gaelic would continue to be spoken in many parts of what would become the Lowlands for centuries more.

From this point of view it would seem premature to make lowlander as Inglis/Anglo-Saxon before 1124... almost 60 years before English grew in prominance in the lowlands. It was spoken in Berwick and Lothian possibly... those maybe can be changed to Anglo-Saxon.

What about this:


Chose Option B:

1066: Most of Scotland changed to Gaelic (Irish changed to Gaelic to represent Irish and Scots Gaelic). Lothian and Berwick changed to Anglo-Saxon, and Caithness and Cumberland as Norweigen. Then Scottish would be reserved for the following scenarios... 1187.... when it is most appropriate. It would then be influenced by Anglo-Saxon-Norman.

You could still "change the displayed name for the 'saxon' tag to Englisc, the contemporary name for the Old English (Anglo-Saxon) language" even with this.

This would also mean you would not have to do anything with the cultural change over. Except maybe add to it any Anglo-Saxon culture still in Scotland to change to Scottish too... alongside Norweigan.
 
Last edited:
I like that idea.
"irish" = Gaelic, used in Ireland and the Highlands (except for the norwegian provinces of course). Initial rulers in Scotland 1066 (except Galloway): Gaelic.
Lowlands saxon province culture.

Then a melting pot that fires as of 1100 that changes saxon or norwegian to scottish.
In the 1187 scenario, Scotland's rulers (except maybe the highlands?) Scottish.

Still needed then are Scottish gaelic names for the "irish" namelist, and these should be removed from the existing scottish name list. Maybe add some old scottish lowlander names (if they exist in a sufficiently different form) to the saxon list as well.


Under this setup scottish would be like english in all aspects -- a pure merge culture, not one that begins in the game.
 
jordarkelf said:
I like that idea.
"irish" = Gaelic, used in Ireland and the Highlands (except for the norwegian provinces of course). Initial rulers in Scotland 1066 (except Galloway): Gaelic.
Lowlands saxon province culture.

Then a melting pot that fires as of 1100 that changes saxon or norwegian to scottish.
In the 1187 scenario, Scotland's rulers (except maybe the highlands?) Scottish.

Still needed then are Scottish gaelic names for the "irish" namelist, and these should be removed from the existing scottish name list. Maybe add some old scottish lowlander names (if they exist in a sufficiently different form) to the saxon list as well.


Under this setup scottish would be like english in all aspects -- a pure merge culture, not one that begins in the game.

I like it too. I dont know much about the melting pot event though. What preconditions are set for that? Year 1100 may be too early. Prehaps between 1125-1150? One of the primary reasons why Anglo-Norman culture came to dominate the lowlands was because King David I of Scotland pushed for it, from the top down. I am uncertin it would have become so dominate without this push.


We have to consider these items too:

Ruling dynasty names: For those areas ruled by Gaelic dynasties in 1066... these dynasty names should be rendered in Gaelic, including the ruling house of Dunkeld to Dùn Chailleann (meaning Fort of the Caledonii).

The first names of Gaelic culture courtiers would necessarily be changed to the more Gaelic rendering.

Additionally, we would need to remove the more Anglized generic names from the Highlands region in favor of Gaelic names. This would suffice all the way until modern times to be honest. The lowlands may retain their more Anglized generic names.

Lowlands saxon province culture.

But not all of the lowlands became Inglis culture this early though. Berwick and Lothian would be the extent in my opinion for 1066.

Lastly: Are we sure the income levels in Scotland/Ireland relfect what was earlier advocated by the now absentee Irish/Scottish bloc?
 
Last edited:
Drachenfire said:
But not all of the lowlands became Inglis culture this early though. Berwick and Lothian would be the extent in my opinion for 1066.

As far as I am aware, there was no real cultural difference between the Scottish Lowlands and pre-Norman England. That's why I suggest using the same tag for both. The same way the English melting pot event will change saxon (in England) to english, the new Scottish melting pot event will change saxon in Scotland to scottish.

Keep in mind 'Inglis' is the name for the language in both its Old English (Anglo-Saxon) stage, as well as the medieaval Scots language which led to modern Scots. In mediaeval times 'Scotis' refered to Scottish gaelic.
I am not proposing using either scottish or english in any province in the 1066 scenario -- they'll all be saxon and will change by event.

In other words:
1066: Lowlander provinces are Saxon, like England. Scottish rulers Gaelic except for the south.
~1100s: Melting pots fire (English one as of 1090 -- Scottish tbd. 1125?). Saxon is changed to English or Scottish depending on area (under certain conditions).
1187 scenario: Scotland ruled by Scottish rulers, Lowlander provinces Scottish
 
jordarkelf said:
As far as I am aware, there was no real cultural difference between the Scottish Lowlands and pre-Norman England. That's why I suggest using the same tag for both. The same way the English melting pot event will change saxon (in England) to english, the new Scottish melting pot event will change saxon in Scotland to scottish.

Keep in mind 'Inglis' is the name for the language in both its Old English (Anglo-Saxon) stage, as well as the medieaval Scots language which led to modern Scots. In mediaeval times 'Scotis' refered to Scottish gaelic.
I am not proposing using either scottish or english in any province in the 1066 scenario -- they'll all be saxon and will change by event.

In other words:
1066: Lowlander provinces are Saxon, like England. Scottish rulers Gaelic except for the south.
~1100s: Melting pots fire (English one as of 1090 -- Scottish tbd. 1125?). Saxon is changed to English or Scottish depending on area (under certain conditions).
1187 scenario: Scotland ruled by Scottish rulers, Lowlander provinces Scottish


But what is untrue however is that all of the lowlands were Inglas speaking in 1066. Of our provinces we have to work with, only Berwick and Lothian should be considered 'Inglis' in culture. The others Fife, Strathclyde, Carrick, and Galloway should be represente by Gaelic culture.

According to my pelminary research, only the region between the Firth of Forth down to the Humber river basin was the maximum extent of the Northumbrian (Anglo-Saxon) dialect for the time frame we are speaking about... 1066

This map should illistrate. The yellow here shows the extent of Northumbrian dialect. All the other land was not Northumbrian speaking, but lowlander Gaelic. It clearly states that before the reign of King David I of Scotland that these regions were Gaelic in speach and mannor.

This artical on Scottish Gaelic clearly states that Lowlander Gaelic predominated in the Lowlands until the 13th century before it was displaced by lowlander Scots (English).

So with the 1066 scenario, only Berwick and Lothian should be of Anglo-Saxon culture. The privinces of Fife, Strathclyde, Carrick, and Galloway should remain Gaelic. With all rulers of Gaelic culture. I do remember someone posting that Edinburgh was not the seat of government during the time we are speaking about either, but can find no evidence of it yet.

Edit:

This statement from History of the Scots language also clarifies:

Northumbrian Old English had been established in south-eastern Scotland as far as the River Forth by the 7th century. It remained largely confined to this area until the 13th century, continuing in common use while Gaelic was the court language. English then spread further into Scotland via the burgh.

After the 12th century early northern Middle English began to spread north and eastwards. It was from this dialect that Early Scots, known to its speakers as "English" (Inglis), began to develop, which is why in the late 12th century Adam of Dryburgh described his locality as "in the land of the English in the Kingdom of the Scots" [2] and why the early 13th century author of de Situ Albanie thought that the Firth of Forth "divides the kingdoms of the Scots and of the English" [3].
 
Last edited:
I feel quite disappointed with the actual representation of Breton nobility in DVIP. I explain myself: It doesn't take into account the french and gallo influence of Britanny during this time.

In the current DVIP setup, the dynasties who own Nantes and Rennes may turn into french in the future (like IRL). But they keep their Breton dynasty's name. So we get weird names such as Philippe Kerne or Louis Roazhon :mad:

2nd effect is ahistorical: the current setup misjudge the fact that a large part of Breton nobility is descended from the carolingian counts. So they still used to speak french.

Here are my proposals to solve this problem:

+get back to the french names of breton dynasties: "de Cornouaille" instead of "Kerne".
+build a new breton's names list. This new list will contain Breton names (of course :D) but in their french form: "Eudes" instead of "Eozen"

These proposals will prevent us from getting weird characters such as "Louis Roazhon". Instead we will get "Louis de Rennes" which sounds to me more correct. Do you agree ?
 
These proposals will prevent us from getting weird characters such as "Louis Roazhon". Instead we will get "Louis de Rennes" which sounds to me more correct. Do you agree ?

I agree.

Since I believe the nobles, especially the ducal and comital dynasties used Frenc as their language and culture. The Breton nobles weren't a world on their own but were closely linked to French and Norman/English nobility.
 
Hasimir Fenring said:
I feel quite disappointed with the actual representation of Breton nobility in DVIP. I explain myself: It doesn't take into account the french and gallo influence of Britanny during this time.

In the current DVIP setup, the dynasties who own Nantes and Rennes may turn into french in the future (like IRL). But they keep their Breton dynasty's name. So we get weird names such as Philippe Kerne or Louis Roazhon :mad:

2nd effect is ahistorical: the current setup misjudge the fact that a large part of Breton nobility is descended from the carolingian counts. So they still used to speak french.

Here are my proposals to solve this problem:

+get back to the french names of breton dynasties: "de Cornouaille" instead of "Kerne".
+build a new breton's names list. This new list will contain Breton names (of course :D) but in their french form: "Eudes" instead of "Eozen"

These proposals will prevent us from getting weird characters such as "Louis Roazhon". Instead we will get "Louis de Rennes" which sounds to me more correct. Do you agree ?

I am sorry to hear of your dissapointment.

But with respect I 100% disagree. Your premis presuposes that Breton culture would naturally have merged with French. But in any plausable alternative scenario this simply can not be assumed.

This is the same argument for countless other cultures that were later assumlated into a neighboring culture: Witness the Scottish/Gaelic discussion amongst others.

Until we get the ability to code more cultures into the game then the pure Breton form is preferred. Gallo is represented by the French language in Rennes and Nantes, ... and by French in later scenarios.

Blame the fact that we can not change or modify our dynasty names while in game on the code itself. For the argument that a dynasty name should be rendered into a new form is common throughout.

As for Louis Kerne rather then Louis de Cornouaille, well the same exact argument could apply for a possible German king in France... Imigine a Henrich Capet instead of a Henri Capet. Or what of a German culture Duke of Brittany? A Ludwig de Cornouaille!

Prehaps you are reacting more to reading the purer Breton names rather then the French rendered versions. You're simply not used to it. Even today Breton is not suported by the French government... and very little to no television is in Breton.. so the use of Breton has declined steadily in recent generations. Almost all publications are in French. History is written by the conqurers, rarely by the conqured. This is the same ironic position for an Irish player who plays in Ireland and sees that most of Ireland in 1066 is renderd in Irish Gaelic rather then in Anglo-Irish.

Furthermore, if it is decided to change the Breton dynasty names and personal names into French (which I object to)... I propose that we simple retag all of them as French culture and use the Celtic tag for Gaelic. Write-off the Bretons as French in culture and language as early as 1066.

We could use the Celtic tag to better effect elsewhere if this is the case.
 
Last edited:
I have no plans to turn the Bretons into crypto-Frenchies.
But I may look at the generic dynasties for the Breton march (Gallo area) provinces and perhaps turn them into Gallo versions.
Unfortunately generic courtier dynasties are linked to province only, regardless of religion or culture.
 
jordarkelf said:
I have no plans to turn the Bretons into crypto-Frenchies.
But I may look at the generic dynasties for the Breton march (Gallo area) provinces and perhaps turn them into Gallo versions.
Unfortunately generic courtier dynasties are linked to province only, regardless of religion or culture.

Yes, this would be very good and acceptable. It is what is planned for Scotland with generic dynasties? The highlands getting the Gaelic rendered generic dynasties while the lowlands get the Scottish (anglo-scot) generic dynasties?


Roazhon (Rennes) in Gallo is Resnn
Nanoed (Nantes) in Gallo is Naunnt

So far I can not find any Gallo names.
 
Last edited:
Drachenfire said:
Yes, this would be very good and acceptable. It is what is planned for Scotland with generic dynasties? The highlands getting the Gaelic rendered generic dynasties while the lowlands get the Scottish (anglo-scot) generic dynasties?
Yes. MacDonald in the southern provinces, Mac Dhomhnuill in the Highlands.

Roazhon (Rennes) in Gallo is Resnn
Nanoed (Nantes) in Gallo is Naunnt

So far I can not find any Gallo names.
I only need dynasties (last names), since there won't be a Gallo culture for first names. Perhaps some courtiers if they can be added at scenario start, but no name list is needed. There's no tag for them.

The only way I can still clear up a tag (or two) is if I merge the three Scandinavian cultures into generic norse, which I do not plan at this time.
 
jordarkelf said:
Yes. MacDonald in the southern provinces, Mac Dhomhnuill in the Highlands.


I only need dynasties (last names), since there won't be a Gallo culture for first names. Perhaps some courtiers if they can be added at scenario start, but no name list is needed. There's no tag for them.

The only way I can still clear up a tag (or two) is if I merge the three Scandinavian cultures into generic norse, which I do not plan at this time.


Lol, I ment so far I can not find any Gallo sirnames. lol. I do not see any need for merging Scandinavian cultures either. One option would be to take place names written in Gallo and use those as sir names. Or... simple leave the Gallo region as French?

Dol was an important city in the early middle ages. That can serve as a sir name too.

This would mean retaging Duchess Hawise to the new dynasty de Resnn? Changing her first name to the more French Hawise instead of Hawiz?
 
Last edited:
Jinnai said:
More Muslim discrepencies.

Mecca, and perhaps Medina should use the Zaidi dynastical tag and the ruler for atleast Mecca the ruler should be Zaidi and shi'ite

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Yemen#Islamic_history

Are you certain? Keep in mind the CK map is severely distorted in that area. I don't think these two provinces represent Yemen, that would be much further to the south.

Political history of Mecca @Wiki implies that Mecca and Medina were held by Hashemites, which were sunni muslims, until the Ottomans in 1517.
 
Drachenfire said:
I am sorry to hear of your dissapointment.

But with respect I 100% disagree. Your premis presuposes that Breton culture would naturally have merged with French. But in any plausable alternative scenario this simply can not be assumed.

This is the same argument for countless other cultures that were later assumlated into a neighboring culture: Witness the Scottish/Gaelic discussion amongst others.

Until we get the ability to code more cultures into the game then the pure Breton form is preferred. Gallo is represented by the French language in Rennes and Nantes, ... and by French in later scenarios.

Blame the fact that we can not change or modify our dynasty names while in game on the code itself. For the argument that a dynasty name should be rendered into a new form is common throughout.

As for Louis Kerne rather then Louis de Cornouaille, well the same exact argument could apply for a possible German king in France... Imigine a Henrich Capet instead of a Henri Capet. Or what of a German culture Duke of Brittany? A Ludwig de Cornouaille!

Prehaps you are reacting more to reading the purer Breton names rather then the French rendered versions. You're simply not used to it. Even today Breton is not suported by the French government... and very little to no television is in Breton.. so the use of Breton has declined steadily in recent generations. Almost all publications are in French. History is written by the conqurers, rarely by the conqured. This is the same ironic position for an Irish player who plays in Ireland and sees that most of Ireland in 1066 is renderd in Irish Gaelic rather then in Anglo-Irish.

Furthermore, if it is decided to change the Breton dynasty names and personal names into French (which I object to)... I propose that we simple retag all of them as French culture and use the Celtic tag for Gaelic. Write-off the Bretons as French in culture and language as early as 1066.

We could use the Celtic tag to better effect elsewhere if this is the case.


Now it's my turn to desagree ;) Concerning Breton, even if I don't speak it, I'm used to reading Breton names each time I go to the street (in the Breton speaking part of Brittany, every roadsign for example is translated in Breton).

Concerning CK, I'm just disappointed with the fact that gallo/french dynasties are badly represented. I just want to find a way to solve that problem. Maybe we could give french culture to the gallo dynasties (I mean, those which come from Rennes, and Nantes).

Concerning purely Breton dynasties, I found a better translation with the help of Breton players:

+"Kerne" is wrong, should be replaced by "ar vro Kerne"
+idem for "Leon", replaced by "ar vro Leon"
+"Porhoet" should be replace by "ar vro Porhoet"

The others 1066 dynasties should be IMO french (representing gallo for some of them):

+"Roazhon" should be replaced by "de Rennes"
+idem for "Penteur" dynasty which is a branch of the "de Rennes" dynasty.
+"Naoned", replaced by "de Nantes".

Otherwise, I found more correct Brittany CoAs, maybe I could post them here and we could discuss about them. It will be great if we could make a more historical CoAs pack for DVIP, don't you think ?