Hello everyone !
And apologies for the long post, I'm not posting often, but when I do, I try to sum up all my argumentation
I just wanted to point out to something I noticed since playing EUIV since the very first versions that I thought could be addressed very easily in a future patch: The developers seemed decided to make the Slovak people disappear from History ^^
At first, I considered this omission was due to the small population concerned, or because the Slovak identity was very weak in 1444. But then I saw the addition of Leonese, Aragonese cultures etc, that also had a similar situation - one could say these were only dialects within the Ibero-Romance culture. I wish some historicity could be brought to the Central European region too, for example putting forward the existence of "czech", "moravian", "slovak" cultures, which were often, today as well as back then, considered as dialects deriving from the same Western-slavic proto-language.
Let me add some historical background: After the Mongol invasions, the land was mostly deserted, and the local Slavic population was scarce. The end of the 13th century saw a massive movement of migration to resettle the lands and rebuild the cities, and the settlers came from Walloonia, Saxony, Hungary, as well as from other Slavic countries, notably the Czechs and Moravians in the west, and Ruthenians and Poles in the east. The Germans settled and thrived in a number of mining towns, the Slavs usually populated smaller cities and the countryside. Hungarian aristocrats started, in the beginning 14th century, building new castles to show their independence to the king, but later in the 14th Hungarian King's role got stronger again, and that's when new privileges were granted to the cities, recognising for instance the presence of the Slovaks in city councils on par with the Hungarians or Germans.
It is true that the feeling of being part of a specific (Slovak) culture did not emerge until the later centuries, the culmination of which was the emergence of the Slovak national movement in the 18th and 19th century; notably because Slovakia had three distinct dialects, and Slovak scholars were fighting among them to settle on one of these to become the new official "Slovak" language... But even prior to having a codified language, the Slovak tongue has existed since the old Slavonic tongue disappeared and when the population kept referring to themselves as the latin scholars did: Slavus (Slavs), an expression they also used in contact with other Slavic peoples (the Polonus, Bohemus, Rutenus). This probably explains why, even today, the word "Slovak" sound so similar to "Slavic". (btw, Slovenian means the same thing too ^^)
One would be wrong to consider that all of the provinces in Slovakia (EUIV's Pozsony, Szepes & Zemplen) were in majority Hungarian even if the Hungarian population was in the past much higher than in nowadays Slovakia. Historically, these were rural lands, most of the local - Slavic - population were either shepherds or woodsmen, since the lands are mainly mountainous or hilly. The lords, either counts, dukes, or clergy, were indeed Hungarian, for almost all of the EUIV time-frame, but although they administered the land (most often in good relation with the indigenous Slavic population), they didn't "convert" the people into Hungarians (Magyars to be more precise). This attempt only appeared in the late 19th century with the birth of romantic ideals of nationalism which caused the downfall of multicultural empires in Europe; notably the Habsburgs, and Ottomans, but the Hungarian kingdom too knew the same ethnic conflicts due to attempts to convert the local people in Slovakia (called Felföld/Felvidék by Hungarians), as well as Transylvanians or Slavonians.
Well, I have to add one more thing: In English (or French, German, Spanish etc) language, it is not foreseen the difference between someone of Hungarian culture and someone from the Hungarian kingdom, unlike in Slavic languages; while in reality, we have two terms for that: Magyar (Maďar) is the original word for "Hungarian" esp. related to culture, language, ethnicity etc... While Hungarian (Hungaricus/Uhorský) relates more to belonging to one Kingdom, and could apply in theory to all people living in the multicultural Hungarian Kingdom, including of course to the Magyars, but also Croats, Slovaks, Romanians, Slovenes, Serbs, Germans... One should not forget that until the 19th century, the official language of that kingdom was Latin
In short, I would like Paradox to consider splitting the "Hungarian" culture into separate and more realistic "Magyar" and "Slovak" cultures. The second should be an accepted culture in Hungary to translate the good relations that existed in these times between the two exactly as the Croats are, they too are Hungarian, but not Magyar. On a similar note, I would consider either changing the culture from "Hungarian" to "Romanian" in Transylvania provinces, since the situation is fairly similar - local indigenous romanian/wlach/transylvanian population governed by a Hungarian elite. It is extremely similar to Rhodes (Knights), which had a Greek population with Latin rulers, which Paradox got quite right (although the Knights were not technically speaking "Maltese" but rather Lombard/Frankish) ...
Hope my suggestions will be considered, I think you guys already do a great job so far !
Best wishes,
Euradeus
While I'm at it, in terms of "dynamic province names", the regions of Pozsony, Szepes & Zemplen would become Prešporok (Bratislava as a name appears only in 1919), Spiš & Zemplín if owned by another country of Slavic culture.
And apologies for the long post, I'm not posting often, but when I do, I try to sum up all my argumentation
I just wanted to point out to something I noticed since playing EUIV since the very first versions that I thought could be addressed very easily in a future patch: The developers seemed decided to make the Slovak people disappear from History ^^
At first, I considered this omission was due to the small population concerned, or because the Slovak identity was very weak in 1444. But then I saw the addition of Leonese, Aragonese cultures etc, that also had a similar situation - one could say these were only dialects within the Ibero-Romance culture. I wish some historicity could be brought to the Central European region too, for example putting forward the existence of "czech", "moravian", "slovak" cultures, which were often, today as well as back then, considered as dialects deriving from the same Western-slavic proto-language.
Let me add some historical background: After the Mongol invasions, the land was mostly deserted, and the local Slavic population was scarce. The end of the 13th century saw a massive movement of migration to resettle the lands and rebuild the cities, and the settlers came from Walloonia, Saxony, Hungary, as well as from other Slavic countries, notably the Czechs and Moravians in the west, and Ruthenians and Poles in the east. The Germans settled and thrived in a number of mining towns, the Slavs usually populated smaller cities and the countryside. Hungarian aristocrats started, in the beginning 14th century, building new castles to show their independence to the king, but later in the 14th Hungarian King's role got stronger again, and that's when new privileges were granted to the cities, recognising for instance the presence of the Slovaks in city councils on par with the Hungarians or Germans.
It is true that the feeling of being part of a specific (Slovak) culture did not emerge until the later centuries, the culmination of which was the emergence of the Slovak national movement in the 18th and 19th century; notably because Slovakia had three distinct dialects, and Slovak scholars were fighting among them to settle on one of these to become the new official "Slovak" language... But even prior to having a codified language, the Slovak tongue has existed since the old Slavonic tongue disappeared and when the population kept referring to themselves as the latin scholars did: Slavus (Slavs), an expression they also used in contact with other Slavic peoples (the Polonus, Bohemus, Rutenus). This probably explains why, even today, the word "Slovak" sound so similar to "Slavic". (btw, Slovenian means the same thing too ^^)
One would be wrong to consider that all of the provinces in Slovakia (EUIV's Pozsony, Szepes & Zemplen) were in majority Hungarian even if the Hungarian population was in the past much higher than in nowadays Slovakia. Historically, these were rural lands, most of the local - Slavic - population were either shepherds or woodsmen, since the lands are mainly mountainous or hilly. The lords, either counts, dukes, or clergy, were indeed Hungarian, for almost all of the EUIV time-frame, but although they administered the land (most often in good relation with the indigenous Slavic population), they didn't "convert" the people into Hungarians (Magyars to be more precise). This attempt only appeared in the late 19th century with the birth of romantic ideals of nationalism which caused the downfall of multicultural empires in Europe; notably the Habsburgs, and Ottomans, but the Hungarian kingdom too knew the same ethnic conflicts due to attempts to convert the local people in Slovakia (called Felföld/Felvidék by Hungarians), as well as Transylvanians or Slavonians.
Well, I have to add one more thing: In English (or French, German, Spanish etc) language, it is not foreseen the difference between someone of Hungarian culture and someone from the Hungarian kingdom, unlike in Slavic languages; while in reality, we have two terms for that: Magyar (Maďar) is the original word for "Hungarian" esp. related to culture, language, ethnicity etc... While Hungarian (Hungaricus/Uhorský) relates more to belonging to one Kingdom, and could apply in theory to all people living in the multicultural Hungarian Kingdom, including of course to the Magyars, but also Croats, Slovaks, Romanians, Slovenes, Serbs, Germans... One should not forget that until the 19th century, the official language of that kingdom was Latin
In short, I would like Paradox to consider splitting the "Hungarian" culture into separate and more realistic "Magyar" and "Slovak" cultures. The second should be an accepted culture in Hungary to translate the good relations that existed in these times between the two exactly as the Croats are, they too are Hungarian, but not Magyar. On a similar note, I would consider either changing the culture from "Hungarian" to "Romanian" in Transylvania provinces, since the situation is fairly similar - local indigenous romanian/wlach/transylvanian population governed by a Hungarian elite. It is extremely similar to Rhodes (Knights), which had a Greek population with Latin rulers, which Paradox got quite right (although the Knights were not technically speaking "Maltese" but rather Lombard/Frankish) ...
Hope my suggestions will be considered, I think you guys already do a great job so far !
Best wishes,
Euradeus
While I'm at it, in terms of "dynamic province names", the regions of Pozsony, Szepes & Zemplen would become Prešporok (Bratislava as a name appears only in 1919), Spiš & Zemplín if owned by another country of Slavic culture.
- 61
- 1
Upvote
0
