Bosnia provinces suggestions (for 24th Dev diary)

[SalK]

I originally posted this as a response to the mentioned dev diary, though I realized it might be smarter to make a new thread for this topic, since that dev diary most likely won't be getting that much traction anymore).

I like the changes, though I have a few suggestions for Bosnia specifically so I hope the devs are still following this thread.

I think the name of Bosnia province should be changed to Usora or Soli, which are historic medieval names for that region. The in-game province is a bit rough, so it's not clear if it should be Usora or Soli (as the actual city Tuzla, then known as Soli is more to the east). However, I would argue for it to be still named Soli (Só in Hungarian) because of the importance of the local salt mines to multiple surrounding states throughout history.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soli_(province)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banate_of_Só
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usora_(province)
(I realize wikipedia articles are not the best sources, but I just want to point you in the general direction)

(Shown above is the spread of Bosnian Kingdom, though I posted it only for the region names.)

My second suggestion would be to consider adding an inland center of trade for the Visoki province. The settlement of Podvisoki was an actual important center of trade at the time, and it could easily be reflected in-game.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visoko_during_the_Middle_Ages#Podvisoki
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Podvisoki
Pavao Anđelić, Srednji vijek – Doba stare bosanske države, „Visoko i okolina kroz historiju I, Visoko 1984, 160-162 (source used in the wikipedia articles)

My third suggestion would be to keep the Travunia province name (or change it to Hum/Zahumlje) as at that point in time it was known by those names for much longer than Hercegovina (which itself covers a bigger region than the in-game province). On a related note, Stjepan Vukčić Kosača assumed the title "Herzog of Hum and the Coast" in 1448, so 4 years after the starting date in EU4.

Travunia historically also had sea access (which would make sense for Duchy of Saint Sava, seeing as it's capital was Herceg Novi, a sea town).
If the provinces stay landlocked, at least consider changing the name of Hum province to Tropolje or Završje, and Hercegovina province to Hum/Zahumlje, which would be more accurate. (You can see these region names in the image I posted above). Though, understandably, the province shapes and sizes would have to be changed a bit in that case.

 

[SalK]

This one isn't a suggestion, more a question, which is why I separated it as it's own post:
Would you consider adding events related to the royal marriage between Stjepan Tomašević Kotromanić and Marija (Jelena) Branković? The marriage was held in 1459. Among others, the motive was to combine and strengthen the region as a response to the Ottoman threat.

"When Lazar Branković, Despot of Serbia, died in 1458, an interregnum ensued. Having left three daughters and no sons, he had no clear heir, so the power was shared between his blinded brother Stephen and widow Helen Palaiologina. King Thomas took advantage of their weakness to recapture Eastern Bosnian towns he had lost to Serbia in 1445. Shortly afterwards, he entered peace negotiations with Lazar's widow, Helen Palaiologina.[8] Abandoning the prospect of his son's marriage to a daughter of the Duke of Milan, Thomas came to an agreement with Helen: Stephen was to marry the eldest of her three daughters by Lazar, the c. 11-year-old Helen.[9] The match was prestigious for Stephen not only because of the bride's descent from the Byzantine imperial family, but also because it brought the government of Serbia to the groom.[10][7]

The Hungarian king Matthias Corvinus agreed to Stephen's engagement with Helen – it was in his interest to create a strong buffer zone between his realm and the Ottoman Empire by uniting the Kingdom of Bosnia and the Despotate of Serbia, which he considered Hungary's vassal states, under Stephen Tomašević.[10][11] The Diet of Hungary confirmed Stephen Tomašević's right to Serbia in January 1459.[12]"

Now because this is a long shot, and quoted from wikipedia, I figured I should provide the sources they used there:

[8] Fine, John Van Antwerp Jr. (1994) [1987]. The Late Medieval Balkans: A Critical Survey from the Late Twelfth Century to the Ottoman Conquest, p. 572.

[9] Miller, Timothy S.; Nesbitt, John W., eds. (1995), Peace and war in Byzantium: essays in honor of George T. Dennis, S.J, Catholic University of America Press, p. 187.

[10][7] Fine 1994, p. 574
Ćirković, Sima (1964). Историја средњовековне босанске државе (in Serbo-Croatian)., p. 317.

[11][12]Babinger, Franz (1992). Mehmed the Conqueror and His Time, p. 163.
Babinger 1992, p. 156.

 

[otaats]

Renaming of Bosna to Soli is pretty logical and should probably be the norm for the (high) medieval Bosnia setup. The settlement grew into a flourishing town of Tuzla under the Ottoman rule - they hold these provinces for most of the game, and Soli (Tuzla) comes along into the equation nicely. Now, for the same reason i'd still go for 'Hercegovina' or 'Stara (Old) Hercegovina' instead of Travunija, as the name 'Hercegovina' really started coming into official use shortly after the start of EU4.

Visoki trading center: while more nuanced and detailed setups might work for a game with a county system (like Crusader Kings), i would go for it. But i don't think we can equalize trade in Visoki with that of Belgrade, or Eastern Adriatic coastal cities. For this reason, i vote no on this specific suggestion. There are many provinces that historically had good trade, that are not represented. You'd set the bar lower, and Visoki would have many rivals in the region (Trgovište, Novo Brdo, Zagreb, Rijeka, Split, Zadar, Kotor, Herceg Novi..). There are ways to work around this in EU4 frames - put a trade boost into Bosnia's reworked idea set.

Stephen's marriage - this would be a perfect mission for a Bosnian mission tree, but i'm not sure if devs confirmed that we're getting one (there will be quite an impressive one for Serbia, and smaller ones for Croatia/Ragusa and Albania).

 

[MadDoctorScientist]

Just passing by to remind everyone that given the "animosity" between Croatia, Serbia and Bosnia, being extra extra careful when naming and grouping provinces is in everyone's best interest.

(and not just because of that East Adriatic nonsense, but also because of it)

 

[otaats]

Just passing by to remind everyone that given the "animosity" between Croatia, Serbia and Bosnia, being extra extra careful when naming and grouping provinces is in everyone's best interest.

(and not just because of that East Adriatic nonsense, but also because of it)

I don't really understand what you're getting at? All the countries would use the same names, given they speak the same language. What East Adriatic nonsense, too? I'd like to know.

 

[MadDoctorScientist]

I don't really understand what you're getting at? All the countries would use the same names, given they speak the same language. What East Adriatic nonsense, too? I'd like to know.

Lika and Istria used to be part of the Croatia Proper area but were moved to a different one (East Adriatic) with some provinces in Italy. Which was a terrible idea.

But the languages are not exact the same, even back then, at least as far as I am aware regarding Croatia. Not sure how Serbian and Bosniak evolved and what not.

Edit: "area" instead of "territory", always get those wrong.

 

[otaats]

They were probably moved because they needed to acommodate all those new provinces into some states. Not a great idea, but it's hardly the point here. My reference to Eastern Adriatic is exactly what it means - coastal towns in Eastern Adriatic, which possess millenias of maritime and trade traditions. Trade in places such as Visegrad, Visoki, Trgoviste, or Novo Brdo, cannot really be compared to those. And they would be if we would give those provinces a Tier 1 trade node.

Languages are for the major part the same, especially place names. All of the names that were mentioned would be referred to identically in all dialects. I don't really understand what do you mean by Serbian and Bosniak languages 'evolving' compared to Croatian. Bosniak is not a language btw.

I don't want to upset you in any way, but you are barking at a tree in a middle of a desert. I don't know what you wanted to achieve by warning us about something that didn't happen or smthn like that. This happens very often on the forums and it's quite annoying - Balkan community argues (very respectfully in majority of cases, and not even disagreeing specifically), but then non-Balkan community comes and says something like what you said, for no reason. OP asked me for an opinion in July 2019, and by mistake i completely forgot to give my 2 cents about this.

 

[MadDoctorScientist]

And that kids is why you must make sure you did not get Albania and Bosnia mixed. (-_____-) But general idea remains.

Anyhow, I was thinking more of our beloved masters at Paradox than of anyone on the thread per se. Seriously, Croats really really really hate when one of the neighbouring countries act a pit too possessive, so pointing out that diving Croatia Proper was a really bad idea.

And I will have you know, sir, that I do not bark at trees. I am a tree. Good day, I say, good day sir!

 

[Mr.Grizzly]

Bosniak is not a language btw.

Uhh, I may not be an expert on the history part of the Bosnian language but it does exist today, it's considered an off-branch of Serbo-Croation, similar to Serbian, Croatian and Montenegrin, yes there is a controversy around it, but it's more about its name, Bosnian vs Bosniak, the Bosnians want it to be called Bosnian while Serbians, Croatians and Bosnians of Serb and Croat descent prefer the term Bosniak. Regardless, it does exist due to the influence of Islam on the region from Turkish, Persian and Arabic languages being put into the area by the Ottoman Empire.

 

[Mr. Capiatlist]

Thread closed.