*cough* You are looking at the wrong plot of land. *cough*That is De Jure aragon, Aquitaine has conquered it.
Actually, not even Barcelona should be de-jure Aquitaine in ToG start. It isn't in karling hands in the CM start and there's less than a century between that and ToG start - no time for it to drift.
Thus, it should stay de-jure Aragon as is.
Actually, not even Barcelona should be de-jure Aquitaine in ToG start. It isn't in karling hands in the CM start and there's less than a century between that and ToG start - no time for it to drift.
Thus, it should stay de-jure Aragon as is.
Actually, not even Barcelona should be de-jure Aquitaine in ToG start. It isn't in karling hands in the CM start and there's less than a century between that and ToG start - no time for it to drift.
Thus, it should stay de-jure Aragon as is.
This is the reason I am ambiguous about the whole de jure concept in general. Barcelona changed hands between catholics and muslims and eventually gained independence far too often to be considered an inherent part of any kingdom IMO. Similar with Mallorca.
This is the reason I am ambiguous about the whole de jure concept in general. Barcelona changed hands between catholics and muslims and eventually gained independence far too often to be considered an inherent part of any kingdom IMO.
oh, the de jure concept is fine. it could be largely expanded with cbs and de jure instant integration decisions for disputed areas like this however.This is the reason I am ambiguous about the whole de jure concept in general. Barcelona changed hands between catholics and muslims and eventually gained independence far too often to be considered an inherent part of any kingdom IMO. Similar with Mallorca.
oh, the de jure concept is fine. it could be largely expanded with cbs and de jure instant integration decisions for disputed areas like this however.
I wondered too if there's an historical reason why it is. I doubt it is an error - you don't make aragon de jure part of aquitaine 'by error' - but the date might be mistaken - it is de jure aquitaine in 769 too, and maybe they just messed up and let it de jure aquitaine in 867 ? (I can't think of a reason why it'd de jure aquitaine in 769 though. Charlemagne surely leaded military expeditions in the area, but he didn't conquer anything, did he ?)