• 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.
Methinks that was a typo. :p

EDIT: There's no such thing as South Balts, friend.
Only Eastern and Western Balts, and the Eastern Balts'd be Eastern Galindians i.e. Golyads.
 
As I said endless possiblities for this era. We are talking about 769 here.

Yes, but my comment was an ironic one since neither Balts nor Greeks had any genetic, cultural or tribal ties to Slavs at that time. You cant simply name something because of other stuff close to them.
 
Yes, but my comment was an ironic one since neither Balts nor Greeks had any genetic, cultural or tribal ties to Slavs at that time. You cant simply name something because of other stuff close to them.
Well, there is the Balto-Slavic thing and Perkunas's conflict with Velinas which occurs in Slavic mythology with Perun and Veles. :p
 
Well, there is the Balto-Slavic thing and Perkunas's conflict with Velinas which occurs in Slavic mythology with Perun and Veles. :p

Ha, well you got me there. Didnt even know about that. Still, not balts.
 
I think something like West Slavic or Lechitic or whatever works is good. The only thing I don't really like the idea of though is a magical change from West Slavic to Polish and so on depending on year. As far as I know Norse can survive as a culture if the province it is in never becomes a part of an independent Norway/Sweden/Denmark etc - so if Iceland becomes an independent Petty Kingdom in 867 and stays independent until the 1400s it will still be Norse, not Norwegian. I think a cultural division should only take place if the kingdoms divide/one or more are created separately, just like with Norse.