Cultures (or: The Great Debate)

[ConjurerDragon]

As you had to mention one extreme I´ll give you the other:

Watching your two province Switzerland for 400 years and living in the shadow of the Habsburgs and France, always in danger to be overrun and annexed is a really bright prospect for the future.

Historically it whould be the other way around for at least 150 years. Switzerland winning battles against any single of it´s neighbours and vastly expanding their starting area into Savoy, Lombardia and formerly habsburg lands. After all Habsburg lords lost Aargau, Thurgaur etc. to the swiss. And the old swiss confederation controlled lands beyond todays Switzerland for a long time:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f1/Territorial-development-Swiss_Confederacy.png
Only after the battle of Margnano the expansion of the swiss confederacy was slowed down
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Marignano

 

[ConjurerDragon]

Splitting Germany between saxon and bavarian based on some linguistic border doesn't seem right to me.

Swabia, Hesse, Rhineland can in no way be described as "of bavarian culture", Pommerania can not be described as "of saxon culture".

Also, where ever you place a cultural "border" in Germany, you won't find any german state that had problems with cultural differences of a "different kind" of Germans. Give historical examples that justify it gameplaywise.

There are several examples I could think of. However between bavarians and bavarians if the split of german into saxon/bavarians would be implemented:
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayrischer_Rummel
Bavaria tries to conquer Tirol during the spanish war of succession - part of Austria and according to language all three "bavarian".

or the other way around when Austria invades and controls all of Bavaria and the bavarians rise in revolt
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sendlinger_Mordweihnacht

 

[unmerged(49888)]

Any chance we could change anglosaxon to English? England was pretty much a mixture by 1419, surely?

 

[Toio]

It has already been discussed and the answer is it needs to change

 

[Garbon]

It has already been discussed and the answer is it needs to change

Was it earlier in this thread?

 

[Toio]

Was it earlier in this thread?

it was agree in 1.58 prior to FTG release

 

[SorelusImperion]

There are several examples I could think of. However between bavarians and bavarians if the split of german into saxon/bavarians would be implemented:
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayrischer_Rummel
Bavaria tries to conquer Tirol during the spanish war of succession - part of Austria and according to language all three "bavarian".

or the other way around when Austria invades and controls all of Bavaria and the bavarians rise in revolt
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sendlinger_Mordweihnacht

These conflicts were between the respective states not between their population with the popular resistance triggered by harsh tax policys or attempts to revert rights which had been traditionally granted to the population. There are virtually no examples of the population rising because cultural differences.

 

[Toio]

These conflicts were between the respective states not between their population with the popular resistance triggered by harsh tax policys or attempts to revert rights which had been traditionally granted to the population. There are virtually no examples of the population rising because cultural differences.

Was'nt it the historical issue that the HRE while being in Vienna and speaking an Austor-bavarian languge made to bow to the reichstag from the 13th century? . I recall that the old germanic linguistic branches of saxon, rhenish, swarbain and others based their finacial and military support on the knowledge that the HRE would not insist on the spread of the "rural/peasant" language being called austro-bavarian.
The term high german for this language is not based on its nobile status, but because it was set in the mountainous alps areas.

The saxons always believed they had the true original german language, while the prussians belieived the same later on.

While there where no cultural revolt is only because of the power of the german princes to impose their wants via the reichstag on the HRE

 

[SorelusImperion]

Was'nt it the historical issue that the HRE while being in Vienna and speaking an Austor-bavarian languge made to bow to the reichstag from the 13th century? . I recall that the old germanic linguistic branches of saxon, rhenish, swarbain and others based their finacial and military support on the knowledge that the HRE would not insist on the spread of the "rural/peasant" language being called austro-bavarian.
The term high german for this language is not based on its nobile status, but because it was set in the mountainous alps areas.

The saxons always believed they had the true original german language, while the prussians belieived the same later on.

While there where no cultural revolt is only because of the power of the german princes to impose their wants via the reichstag on the HRE

Language should never be confused with culture as it is only one element of it. It was never an issue between the princes and they simply didn't care which German dialect the Emperor was speaking. Even during the rule of Charles V. who was in conflict with the princes and couldn't properly speak any German dialect the topic language was never brought up as an issue.
When it comes to the local population they were usually satisfied as long as their customs were tolerated, the taxes were at an acceptable level and peace was preserved. Other than that only the legality of the rulers claim and possible violations of the political tradition could be an issue as could be religion. And when German nationalism began to manifest itself it included all of the groups speaking some form of german dialect with the sole exeption of the german speaking Swiss and the Dutch (assuming that you consider their language at the time as a German dialect) which had developed an independent identity for quite some time.
Now splitting up German culture could help to allow foreign nations to expand into some parts of Germany if they get the respective culture for that area (let's say by giving Denmark or Sweden "northern german" culture) but it should be made sure that German principalties won't face artificall and ahistoricall disadvantages when expanding within Germany.

 

[Toio]

Now splitting up German culture could help to allow foreign nations to expand into some parts of Germany if they get the respective culture for that area (let's say by giving Denmark or Sweden "northern german" culture) but it should be made sure that German principalties won't face artificall and ahistoricall disadvantages when expanding within Germany.

I agree

I currently ( IN MY GAMES) already have bavarian, saxon and north german as well as the remainder as plain german. So i can understand what your are saying. The question is to convince and agree on what needs to be changed in the official version

 

[Bordic]

Imho we could try a three culture splitting in Germany and see what happens in order to keep more German minors in game without using any scripted helper event.

 

[unmerged(174860)]

i think german + austrian/bavarian is fine

 

[Herr Doctor]

So is it any consensus regarding German culture split?

And what about Scandinavian culture btw?

 

[ConjurerDragon]

So is it any consensus regarding German culture split?

And what about Scandinavian culture btw?

No, currently we don´t have a general concensus but a lot of opinions and several different suggestions how to split german and scandinavian.

IMO most of the language maps linked in earlier posts show the distribution of german dialects after WW2 and are pretty useless for us.
That link
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/bb/Sprachenkarte_Deutschland1880.png
shows the distribution around 1880 so pre-WW1. BUT that should be taken with a large grain of salt too. It not only gives the dutch as part of lower german but makes the scandinavians striped germans just as the walloons are striped french. We could split celtic to breton, celtic, irish and welsh - and in turn merge german, dutch and scandinavian to germanian ^^

And even if we agree on the lingual borders from 1419 to 1820 - a time in which a lot of changes occured -then we still have the problem to decide which country should get what culture.

e.g. Habsburg Austria. Clearly bavarian as Toio for example suggested. Tyrol, Bavaria, Ostmarch --> bavarian.
And according to that OLD distribution map (far pre-FtG)
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/42/AlthochdeutscheSprachräume962_Box.jpg
"bavarian" would be the bright orange area.

But then - HAB ruled other areas too. Silesia, Sundgau/Breisgau that are located in our Strassburg or Baden province. The german areas in Bohemia. Vorderösterreich that was spread throughout our Würtemberg province. Aargau and Thurgau right in the midst of Switzerland until the Swiss conquered them.
It would be very strange to see spanish have dutch culture (even if only for a while) while seeing Austria not having the culture of Baden/Sudeten/Silesia...
And Silesia was one of the richest provinces of Austria and certainly NOT "bavarian."

So Austria would still need to have not only bavarian but the other german dialect too. So effectively that would mean that for Austria nothing would have changed...At least for the first 300 years of the game until they lose Silesia and could lose "northern german" or "saxon" or whatever Silesia would be. It would only be a deterrent for the minor german states (e.g. Mainz, Hessen) who only would get one of the german cultures - which again is a strange solution if we look atother minors like Lorraine, Savoy or Pommerania who get two very differnt major cultures.

For any outside nation (e.g. France) nothing changes - it´s the same if there is one german culture that FRA does not have or 3.

IMO splitting away a "northern" or coastal german area would be only useful if we can give Denmark access to that culture to rule Schleswig, Holstein, Oldenburg, Bremen and if we balance that by Denmark losing the culture of Sweden in midgame by splitting Scandinavian too if they historically lose Sweden. However it would be easier to turn Holstein scandinavian under danish rule ^^

 

[Herr Doctor]

Well, all culture setup in game is very artificial. There was no one sole French ethnic culture and identity (well, one was "French" as much as he was a subject to the French king) until the French revolution. Or what is "Swiss" in terms of ethnicity and language? This is all in many ways simplification, kind of assumption that could be useful in game terms. The main idea as I understand it to avoid very odd ahistorical results and to portrait more or less the accurate "ethnic" situation.

As to the subject, I think Low German, High German and "Austrian" (southern and eastern parts of Bavarian, Silesian, Swabian language historical Habsburg dominions) would make sense. There should be some kind of mechanism to avoid blobbing in Germany.

Same with Scandinavia, because as of now most of times in AGCEEP I see AI Denmark taking half of Sweden or AI Sweden taking all of Norway already in the game's 16th century, producing wealth and manpower from them. No real historical action or struggle then later in game.

And just for the sake of accuracy may be something could be done with the "Celtic" culture (Irish, "Scottish", Welsh and Breton)?

Also what about returning Frisian? It was long time ago in AGCEEP as I remember but later it was removed because of tags lack. I understand that one-province cultures are not priority in AGCEEP usually, but this case looks a bit odd right now.

 

[ConjurerDragon]

Well, all culture setup in game is very artificial. There was no one sole French ethnic culture and identity (well, one was "French" as much as he was a subject to the French king) until the French revolution. Or what is "Swiss" in terms of ethnicity and language? This is all in many ways simplification, kind of assumption that could be useful in game terms. The main idea as I understand it to avoid very odd ahistorical results and to portrait more or less the accurate "ethnic" situation.

As to the subject, I think Low German, High German and "Austrian" (southern and eastern parts of Bavarian, Silesian, Swabian language historical Habsburg dominions) would make sense. There should be some kind of mechanism to avoid blobbing in Germany.

From a language point of view there is no austrian - only bavarian. From a gamist point of view "austrian"would be possible - if Silesia changes from "austrian" to whatever culture Prussia has when it´s conquered and Baden changes culture too when Austria loses the province.

Also what about returning Frisian? It was long time ago in AGCEEP as I remember but later it was removed because of tags lack. I understand that one-province cultures are not priority in AGCEEP usually, but this case looks a bit odd right now.

Not only for a lack of tags - after the merger of most of the indian languages into "natives" there had been enough tags. However it was a general rule of thumb not to have any one-province-cultures except for excellent reasons. That´s why frisian (and syrian) have been removed in earlier AGCEEP versions and that´s why I´m against creating any new one-province-cultures again (e.g. Toios suggestion to give Wales welsh culture).

 

[Herr Doctor]

From a language point of view there is no austrian - only bavarian. From a gamist point of view "austrian"would be possible - if Silesia changes from "austrian" to whatever culture Prussia has when it´s conquered and Baden changes culture too when Austria loses the province.

As I said there are other examples in game when "language" principle is not that universal (Swiss for example). And "culture" is not necessary language (because if so, Italy should have 10 game "cultures" instead of two). From the historical point of view you should also consider importance of "identity" and "loyalty" (in AGCEEP terms for example "Ruthenian" changing to "Ukrainian" in the 1650s). "Austrian" is very useful both for game mechanics and for the historical representation of Austrian identity. As you made a good example above about the Bavarian uprising against the short Austrian military occupation in early 18th century despite the close dialects.

Not only for a lack of tags - after the merger of most of the indian languages into "natives" there had been enough tags. However it was a general rule of thumb not to have any one-province-cultures except for excellent reasons. That´s why frisian (and syrian) have been removed in earlier AGCEEP versions and that´s why I´m against creating any new one-province-cultures again (e.g. Toios suggestion to give Wales welsh culture).

I understand but West Friesland being German? This is really odd. It is more sense to make it "English" then.

 

[ConjurerDragon]

...
I understand but West Friesland being German? This is really odd. It is more sense to make it "English" then.

West Friesland? Do you mean Holland? Holland is dutch.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Friesland_(historical_region)

 

[Herr Doctor]

West Friesland? Do you mean Holland? Holland is dutch.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Friesland_(historical_region)

No I mean Friesland province.

 

[ConjurerDragon]

No I mean Friesland province.

Ah - that´s not Westfriesland in the ancient sense of frisia but in the modern sense.

Friesland currently starts german/german so that it does not fall into dutch hands too early (as frisian has been removed as a culture and it should not have dutch to oppose it´s ancient enemy holland). Gelre/Gelderland is a similar matter as it starts 1419 german/german and changes to dutch later. Event FRI 141007 changes states german to dutch and 171008 that changes provincegerman to dutch.