• 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.
any reason we have toledo as capital of CAS/SPA when as per notes below it was valladolid

Valladolid was captured from the Moors in the tenth century, being a small village improved by count Pedro Ansúrez in the eleventh century; in 1469 Queen Isabella of Castile and King Ferdinand of Aragon were married in the city and by the fifteenth century it was the residence of the kings of Castile and remained the capital of the Kingdom of Spain until 1561, when Philip II, born here, moved the capital to Madrid

Valladolid is in our map of Leon
Reason is Casitlian capital moved with each move of the king. In other words, there was no capital. Anyway, Valladolid could be the last capital before final Madrid.
 
Reason is Casitlian capital moved with each move of the king. In other words, there was no capital. Anyway, Valladolid could be the last capital before final Madrid.

are you saying

1419 to 1479 (marriage of Isabella and Fernando) capital is Toledo

from 1479 to 1561 , capital in Valladolid

1561 and rest of game , capital in madrid
 
are you saying

1419 to 1479 (marriage of Isabella and Fernando) capital is Toledo

from 1479 to 1561 , capital in Valladolid

1561 and rest of game , capital in madrid

would this suffice

#(1479-1490) The formation of Spain by Castile
#by Twoflower and Fodoron
event = {
id = 142014
trigger = {
event = 142013 #CAS: Isabel and Fernando Kings of Aragon
OR = {
atwar = no
year = 1490
}
NOT = { event = 111025 } #ARG forms Spain
NOT = { exists = SPA }
}
random = no
country = CAS
name = "EVENTNAME142014" #Regnum Hispaniorum
desc = "EVENTHIST142014"
#-#For centuries the Christians in the Iberian Peninsula have dreamed of restoring the Visigothic Kingdom that was destroyed by the Muslim invasion. Many Kings have tried to achieve this union of Christians by force of arms, and have carried the title of Hispaniorum Imperator. Between them Sancho III of Navarre and Alfonso VII of Castile nearly achieved unity. But it was not by force that unity could be imposed, as a strong sense of freedom had been developed by the Iberians in their long struggle against Islam, manifested in an equally long struggle against their Christian neighbors. But the peaceful union under Isabel and Fernando will finally achieve what force could not. Under the fierce independence there was a common layer that Fernando and Isabel will identify and use to unite the new country. It was religion and the concept of blood purity. Now, with the country at peace it was a question of prioritizing the international policies of the new powerful entity. First Granada, Castile's biggest dream, as a crusade was useful to unite the peasants and nobles of the country under the same banner. It was a tremendous task, as the Moorish resistance had concentrated in Granada's roughest terrain and 400 years of defensive works had made it a bastion that will require ten years of continuous assaults. It was soon clear to Europeans that a new political entity had been born, and both Iberians and foreigners started referring to it not as Castile and Aragon, but as Spain.

date = { day = 16 month = january year = 1479 }
offset = 15
deathdate = { day = 29 month = december year = 1490 }

action_a = {
name = "ACTIONNAME142014A" #A new country is born
command = { type = flagname which = "" }
command = { type = country which = SPA }
command = { type = capital which = 435 } #Leon
command = { type = domestic which = aristocracy value = -1 }
#command = { type = AI which = Spa_time1479.ai } #War of granada
#command = { type = sleepevent which = 990100 } #Spanish bpai up to Dec. 1479 #SPA_AI_EVENT
#command = { type = sleepevent which = 990101 } #Spanish bpai 1480-1490 #SPA_AI_EVENT
}
}
 
are you saying

1419 to 1479 (marriage of Isabella and Fernando) capital is Toledo

from 1479 to 1561 , capital in Valladolid

1561 and rest of game , capital in madrid

would this suffice

#(1479-1490) The formation of Spain by Castile
#by Twoflower and Fodoron
event = {
id = 142014
trigger = {
event = 142013 #CAS: Isabel and Fernando Kings of Aragon
OR = {
atwar = no
year = 1490
}
NOT = { event = 111025 } #ARG forms Spain
NOT = { exists = SPA }
}
random = no
country = CAS
name = "EVENTNAME142014" #Regnum Hispaniorum
desc = "EVENTHIST142014"
#-#For centuries the Christians in the Iberian Peninsula have dreamed of restoring the Visigothic Kingdom that was destroyed by the Muslim invasion. Many Kings have tried to achieve this union of Christians by force of arms, and have carried the title of Hispaniorum Imperator. Between them Sancho III of Navarre and Alfonso VII of Castile nearly achieved unity. But it was not by force that unity could be imposed, as a strong sense of freedom had been developed by the Iberians in their long struggle against Islam, manifested in an equally long struggle against their Christian neighbors. But the peaceful union under Isabel and Fernando will finally achieve what force could not. Under the fierce independence there was a common layer that Fernando and Isabel will identify and use to unite the new country. It was religion and the concept of blood purity. Now, with the country at peace it was a question of prioritizing the international policies of the new powerful entity. First Granada, Castile's biggest dream, as a crusade was useful to unite the peasants and nobles of the country under the same banner. It was a tremendous task, as the Moorish resistance had concentrated in Granada's roughest terrain and 400 years of defensive works had made it a bastion that will require ten years of continuous assaults. It was soon clear to Europeans that a new political entity had been born, and both Iberians and foreigners started referring to it not as Castile and Aragon, but as Spain.

date = { day = 16 month = january year = 1479 }
offset = 15
deathdate = { day = 29 month = december year = 1490 }

action_a = {
name = "ACTIONNAME142014A" #A new country is born
command = { type = flagname which = "" }
command = { type = country which = SPA }
command = { type = capital which = 435 } #Leon
command = { type = domestic which = aristocracy value = -1 }
#command = { type = AI which = Spa_time1479.ai } #War of granada
#command = { type = sleepevent which = 990100 } #Spanish bpai up to Dec. 1479 #SPA_AI_EVENT
#command = { type = sleepevent which = 990101 } #Spanish bpai 1480-1490 #SPA_AI_EVENT
}
}
 
Reason is Casitlian capital moved with each move of the king. In other words, there was no capital. Anyway, Valladolid could be the last capital before final Madrid.

Indeed. We've already gone over this ad nauseam and a quote from wiki isn't sufficient reason to change.
 
Indeed. We've already gone over this ad nauseam and a quote from wiki isn't sufficient reason to change.

really !!

What was the outcome and why was toledo chosen when all i can find prior to the "marriage" was Burgos as a capital?
 
I don't remember why Toledo was "chosen" but I clearly remember Fodoron's explanations about the "no capital" issue.

Event 142014 could be used if Valladolid "settlement" is really important.
 
also map below of hisorical castile

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Castilian_people.PNG

brown = Castilla y León
purple = Castilla-La Mancha
red = madrid
Funny that you should accuse me of posting a modern map,
definite.jpg


when you are posting exactly the same one a couple of posts later.
castilianpeople.png


This third one to clarify things about Castile-Leon, just because your supposedly Castilla y Leon does not include Leon.
mapn.jpg


Now what you are claiming, based on modern numbers, is that the small provinces in blue and green were much more populated than the larger Santander, Burgos, Palencia and northern Valladolid areas (in the first map). I'll believe that when I see demographical figures for 1419.


some info

page 16 in the link
http://books.google.com.au/books?id...=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=5#PPA16,M1

the Basque Country and Navarra– are entitled to maintain their historical norms or regimes, which in fiscal terms translates into them having a substantially different Tax system, known as Concierto (Basque Country) and Convenio (Navarra) systems. Both these terms translate into English as ‘agreement’5. The main characteristic of this kind of system is that it entails a maximum level of taxation autonomy, which means in their provinces (Álava, Vizcaya and Guipúzcoa, in the case of the Basque Country, and Navarra, which is uni-provincial)
Many cities and communities and corporations had fiscal peculiarities in the Middle-Ages and early Modern Era, this quote of yours does not convince me that the Basques had some very special privileges.
 
really !!

What was the outcome and why was toledo chosen when all i can find prior to the "marriage" was Burgos as a capital?

Yes really. Here's what I could glean on a few swipes through the archives:

2003 in EEP: http://www.europa-universalis.com/forum/showthread.php?t=32572&page=16

2003 in AGC, first post: http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/showthread.php?t=64293

October 2004, see posts 509-511: http://www.europa-universalis.com/forum/showthread.php?t=106915&page=26

November 2004, see posts 752, 759, 783, 785: http://www.europa-universalis.com/forum/showthread.php?t=106915&page=38

Early 2006: http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/showpost.php?p=5431239&postcount=1540

Later 2006, posts 2006-2010: http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/showthread.php?t=106915&page=101
 
[...]

Unlike some I don't really care what language groups are where, but rather how well did the writ of the crown run in those lands. What evidence is there that the province of Aragon didn't pay its full share of taxes to the court in Barcelona? If nothing can be found then I suggest that it be changed to catalan to match the rest of the Kingdom of Aragon.

[...]
This is what I referred to, and I do not mind that it goes catalan, [...]
So we do have a consensus.


says the guy who does NOT claim to be the memory of this forum. :p
 

Thanks Garbon:)

more confused than ever :confused:

Fodoron, said ( to summarise ) that, in toledo is best to prevent the CAS player or AI in loosing a province with gold.
He opted for Burgos but said Valladolid was what most historians said
 
Funny that you should accuse me of posting a modern map,
definite.jpg


when you are posting exactly the same one a couple of posts later.
castilianpeople.png

I had to rebalance the advantage you got even though yours was in error :D


This third one to clarify things about Castile-Leon, just because your supposedly Castilla y Leon does not include Leon.
mapn.jpg
do not know what u mean


Now what you are claiming, based on modern numbers, is that the small provinces in blue and green were much more populated than the larger Santander, Burgos, Palencia and northern Valladolid areas (in the first map). I'll believe that when I see demographical figures for 1419.

yes, i gave the modern population numbers and by logics I also said that 400 years of ethnic cleanings from the time of the spanish inquition (1540) to general Franco in the 20th century of the basques, still gives them an advantage.

Many cities and communities and corporations had fiscal peculiarities in the Middle-Ages and early Modern Era, this quote of yours does not convince me that the Basques had some very special privileges.

page 16
 
Now what you are claiming, based on modern numbers, is that the small provinces in blue and green were much more populated than the larger Santander, Burgos, Palencia and northern Valladolid areas (in the first map). I'll believe that when I see demographical figures for 1419.

You need to exclude the Cantabrians of Santander, I did, ..........their language was their own more closer to castilian than basque, but there culture was more basque than castilian , like food, dress ( boina as an example ), tribal/clan lifestyle
 
Thanks Garbon:)

more confused than ever :confused:

Fodoron, said ( to summarise ) that, in toledo is best to prevent the CAS player or AI in loosing a province with gold.
He opted for Burgos but said Valladolid was what most historians said

I think the position is that there really wasn't a capital in the sense of a Paris or a London but because one is needed by the game, one can defend the choice of any one of those three. That being the case, it looks like game play considerations tipped the balance. I've no idea whether those considerations are still important, but I'd hate to see it thought that this issue was never discussed.
 

Interesting. And this raises the issue that the Spanish Crown doesn't seem to have exerted the same level of control over the Basque lands as it did over the Kingdom of Castile so should we deny Spain Basque culture like we took Catalan away until the Bourbons come in and clean house? My answer is maybe, depending on what the ingame effects are. We might have to offset it by increasing taxes somewhere in Castile in compensation, but it would really show that Castile was the economic foundation of the Crown.

And the book provides some evidence that there should be some low level of unrest in all the Basque lands to reflect the brotherhood wars, or whatever they're called until about 1460 or the reign of Isabella. But I'd prefer a lot more detail on the relations between Crown and Basques before I started writing events.
 
Interesting. And this raises the issue that the Spanish Crown doesn't seem to have exerted the same level of control over the Basque lands as it did over the Kingdom of Castile so should we deny Spain Basque culture like we took Catalan away until the Bourbons come in and clean house? My answer is maybe, depending on what the ingame effects are. We might have to offset it by increasing taxes somewhere in Castile in compensation, but it would really show that Castile was the economic foundation of the Crown.

And the book provides some evidence that there should be some low level of unrest in all the Basque lands to reflect the brotherhood wars, or whatever they're called until about 1460 or the reign of Isabella. But I'd prefer a lot more detail on the relations between Crown and Basques before I started writing events.

Thats my point in our AGCEEP, we can make historical change as long as the balance does not prevent historical accuracy in the game, a bit of give and take

Another site which should interest yourself and AGCEEP

http://books.google.com.au/books?id=K94wQ9MF2JsC&printsec=frontcover&dq="stateless"#PPA164,M1

Encyclopedia of the Stateless Nations: S-Z
By James Minahan

this is the S-Z, there is one A-C etc etc etc
 
Interesting in page 163 of this book:

yep

and in the previous page it says linguistically they ( argonese) have a navarro (basque) dialect.

As i stated, to keep the status quo , i elected basque for aragon province, but i will not fight it being catalan. although the increased strength of ARG "might" be an issue............BUT castilian for aragon province in entirely wrong.
 
I think the position is that there really wasn't a capital in the sense of a Paris or a London but because one is needed by the game, one can defend the choice of any one of those three. That being the case, it looks like game play considerations tipped the balance. I've no idea whether those considerations are still important, but I'd hate to see it thought that this issue was never discussed.

so will you have an issue with my changes, post 3204