Grand Culture Mod : (Cultures I'd like to see instated)

[unmerged(27913)]

St. Gallen Italian? Is this supposed to represent the Friulians? Do they live that far north?

St.Gallen is not Italian, it's german...Chur is Italian.

Veglia Italian/Dalmatian? Any new info here?

Yes I decided to make it Italian as the islands and the coastal cities were mainly Latin/Dalmatian....Italian is the closest.

I don't really agree with the shrinking of the Finnish/Uralic/Whatever culture, specifically Nizhny Novgorod which is the historic cpaital of the Mordvins.

Really?! But weren't you questioning me the last time for making them so big?
Anyway it seemd awfully big to me, but I can revert Nizhy Novgorod back to Finnish(merged with for Ugric/Uralic). Anyway I'll revert it back as was proposed by people who know a bit more then me on the subject.

Abghazia and Kasogs Alan? There are a lot of Georigan experts on the forum, I'd like to hear about why this was done.

Well you see I made this because Abkhazia and Kassogs(actually and early name for one of the Abkhazian-Circassian tribes) were closely related to Alans. In fact Alan tag would be actually a general tag for all those tiny Abkhazian-Persian/Iranian-Caucassian-Circassian people living there. So it's really logical you see.

Taron and Amida Kurdish? Seleukeia Greek? Why are so much Armenian history books in Armenian? I'd look it up but this currently seems to be my problem.

Amida -

"Diyarbakir [dēyär'bäkŭr"]
Pronunciation Key

Diyarbakir , anc. Amida, city (1990 pop. 375,767), capital of Diyarbakir prov., SE Turkey, on the Tigris (Dicle) River. It is the trade center for a region producing grains, melons, cotton, copper ore, and petroleum. Manufactures of the city include flour, wine, textiles, and machinery. A Roman colony from A.D. 230, the city was taken (mid-4th cent.) by Shapur II of Persia. It was conquered by the Arabs in 638 and later was held by the Seljuk Turks and Persians. The Ottoman Turks captured Diyarbakir in 1515. It is a Kurdish population center. The city retains the magnificent black basalt fortification walls mainly constructed by Constantine I in the 4th cent. Diyarbakir Univ. is there."

As you can see Amida is not Armenian since early-mid 7th century.

Taron was also taken in mid 7th century....in any case Armenians were present there, but they were a minority and Kurds were a majority. However do note that I am not only making this mod...I am also making a mod that will change the borders of some kingdoms and duchies(will correct them) and will add some kingdoms among whom will be 'Kingdom of Armenia' including revised Principality of Armenia and whole Principality of Mesopotamia.

Regarding the Seleukeia I did made it Armenian, but I chaged my mind and left it as it is in the original, anyway I reverted it back to Armenian culture...these are just small mistakes....I needed to correct anyway...

Senoussi Arab? isn't Senoussi by far Berber? I admit the name is a bit misleading but the interior, even one such as the location of this province was still predominatly Berber.

Personally I must admit that I know virtually nothing about North Africa...so you might be right. In fact I think Solmyr did made them Berber...in any case as I said Berber issue is still very much open....

Abauj Hungarian? Well it can be argued for either side. Any new info you may have gotten would be interesting.

Hmmm....well it should be Russian...seems I forgot to color it, however I did wrote it down...

Plaun Wendish? I guess this makes sense looking at it from an aesthetic and geographic point of view. I haven't found any information to say that there was a great need of German settlers in the region though.

I was looking at the screen from a German atlas regarding German settlements and it shows that Germans started moving into that region around 12th century....until that time it was predominantly Slavic(Polabian, Sorbish, etc...)

Boulogne Dutch? I thought he just suggested Guines, but, if he was able to prove it (as it's rather plausible and I don't know much about that region) then that's ok.

Actually Boulogne is Dutch in the new beta patch so I guess it's right. I actually reshaped the Dutch as it is now currentnly in the beta....seems Solmyr has had his fingers in it.

Occitan shrinkage. Did you get new sources on the distrubution of Occitan? If it's a new book or something I'd like to pick it up, I don't have enough French history books!

Yes, actually there was a man(sad he was Occitan in fact) writing on the subject in this very thread not far ago...I think it may be even on the same page....in any case I checked what he was talking about and I foudn out that Occitan was even smaller than he even suggested. The border of goes by the line: Bordeaux-Limousin-Auvergne-Forez-Dauphine-Nice even to this very day. Occitan was spoken before in some regions of southern Poitou region but they were used mainly together with French or langue d'oil. In fact now that I look at the map it seems I also forgot to make Angoulem French too...it should not be Occitan too. In any case Poitout region and Bourbon was one of the strongest French-speaking regions and it is wrong to have them as Occitan.

Rioja Castillian? I know medieval Iberian history as well as I know French medieval history

La Rioja was always strickly Castilian, never it was Basque. La Rioja was however part of Navarrese kingdom, but it was mainly Castilian. The county that should be Basque and it isn't is Vizcaya.

The mystery brown blob in in the Urals I assume is Bolgar?

It's actually Bulgarian, same tag as the one used in Balkans. I thought the best to represent them is to make them part of the same tag...there really wasn't much difference between Volga and Danube Bulgarians(as they were known) except maybe in religion....later of course the differences widened and Volga Bulgarians recieved huge influx of Tatar(Mongol) blood and they started to call themselves Tatars. However I would still like to know what resident Bulgarians have to say on this like Tzar Kaloyan, posibbly Enravota and others...

Well anyway, great work Finellach

Thanks.

Also I think I use too many smilies

Well not as many as I do. :rofl:

 

[unmerged(23126)]

I saved target as instead of just clicking on the link and it worked. The map is really nice and most of the things that caught my attention were brought up by Semi-Lobster in his post so I won't repeat them. I am a bit confused by what seems to be a Vlach Thessalonike area. I knew they had a presence there but a majority? Aside from that, a bit of polishing (ie. province exchanging) and I think this project could be finished and implemented very soon. Once again, great work!

 

[unmerged(27913)]

I saved target as instead of just clicking on the link and it worked.

Well I don't know what may be the problem, but it works normally for me either way...

I am a bit confused by what seems to be a Vlach Thessalonike area. I knew they had a presence there but a majority?

They represent Aromanians and Megleno-Vlachs who were definately a majority in Northern Greece. In fact it is believed that most people today in Northern Greece(Greek province of Macednia) and Republic of Macedonia(FYROM) are descendants of Vlachs. Even Albanians have huge Vlach influx. The thing is that over the centuries they assimilated and are now endagered minority....in fact Greeks don't even recognize them as minority and there are even people within Vlach community in Greece who claim they are "Vlachophone Greeks"....this is all motivated by political reasons and is in fact connected with the issue Greece is having with FYROM's constitutional name - Republic of Macedonia.

Also I must point out that Vlachs had very important role in bulding a modern-day Greece and there are many Greeks heroes from the Greco-Turksih wars that were in fact, no more-no less, Vlachs(Aromanians or Megleno-Vlachs).

In any case not to get too much off topic I must say that this is not definte and it may change if I get the right info....personally I am still doubting in adding Vlachs in Thessaly and Albanians as a whole...as I said before Albanians nobles had Greek names and spoke Greek among themselves so they were basically Greeks....

Btw. from Euratlas map of 1300 AD

Aside from that, a bit of polishing (ie. province exchanging)

Did you had something in mind?

and I think this project could be finished and implemented very soon. Once again, great work!

Hopefully 1.05 patch will come out soon enough so I can finally implement this.

 

[unmerged(23126)]

They represent Aromanians and Megleno-Vlachs who were definately a majority in Northern Greece.

Well I knew who they represented, just never knew they were a majority. As for the rest of the map, as I said before I like it. I'm not much of an expert on this period though so I can't really say which cultures were on which turf. I do find the finnic group is underepresented on this map though. I was also looking at the 2 southernmost slovak provinces, which I thought should be hungarian, but I think you'll be able to provide me with a explanation for that. I guess these places were not quite hungarian yet? Other than that, I read the explanation for making Dalmatia italian but it still doesn't seem right. Then again I can't think of a better solution so I guess it's best this way. That's about it really. I'll leave the rest of the nitpicking to the others.

 

[unmerged(27913)]

Well I knew who they represented, just never knew they were a majority.

Well they were at least very significant minority if not anything else...in any case I must point out that Greeks weren't a majority there not even in the 19th century....but thats something totally else...

I do find the finnic group is underepresented on this map though.

What do you mean "underpresented"?! It's huge!

I was also looking at the 2 southernmost slovak provinces, which I thought should be hungarian, but I think you'll be able to provide me with a explanation for that. I guess these places were not quite hungarian yet?

They were Slovak at that time. I can post you a Hungarian map actually with designation 'Szlavok'(Slavs) for the region. In fact Pressburg should be Slovak as well, but I am not inclined to do it since it's a capital province for Hungary....perhaps I should....

Other than that, I read the explanation for making Dalmatia italian but it still doesn't seem right. Then again I can't think of a better solution so I guess it's best this way.

Well I had the same concernes but there isn't really a better solution...besides I think of Italian to be a tag that represents all Italo-Dalmatian and Italic languages of Italy and surrounding areas.

 

[unmerged(23126)]

What do you mean "underpresented"?! It's huge!

Well it is huge that's for sure. Perhaps I should have written "slightly underepresented" instead. I just feel that a few of the Russian provinces should be finnic. Perhaps an in-between of the previous map's border and the current one's would be best? I thought you said you had first expanded the finnic presence because someone who knew a lot about the region said it would make more sense? But don't mind me, as I said before, I'm far from an expert on the subject.

 

[Enravota]

It's actually Bulgarian, same tag as the one used in Balkans. I thought the best to represent them is to make them part of the same tag...there really wasn't much difference between Volga and Danube Bulgarians(as they were known) except maybe in religion....later of course the differences widened and Volga Bulgarians recieved huge influx of Tatar(Mongol) blood and they started to call themselves Tatars. However I would still like to know what resident Bulgarians have to say on this like Tzar Kaloyan, posibbly Enravota and others...

I would not recommend using the same tag. in the 11th century the diffrences between Volga Bulgars and Dunabic Bulgars was too great to use one tag. First the two peoples were already different ethnicaly (Volga Bulgars mixed with the local Kipchac tribes, while Dunabic Bulgars united with the local Slavic Tribes) and used different state language (Turki in Bolgar and Slavic in Bulgaria) even without considering the different religion. The names were also different. i think the best is to give Volga Bolgars a separate tag (yeah i know ) or merge them with the neighbouring Kipchaks.

as on the Vlachian (Aromanian) issue, i think it will be too hard to represent them in the static CK. Vlachs in Thessalia were semi-nomadic herders traveling around with their stock in search for pastures. Their nomadic lifestyle cannot be represented. still i believe that presentig them as majority in Thessaly would be an exaggeration

 

[unmerged(27913)]

Ok since I really went too far with constant changing of some of the province cultures I decided to make it final, these are the conclusions:
1. Finnish/Finnic will be restored to the original proposition, so Ryzan, Nizhny Novgorod, Murom and Kostroma are now again Finnish
2. Adrianpolis is now definately Greek and will remin as such
3. Vlach tag represent and will only represent Daco-Romanian tribes north of Danube, the Aromanians, Megleno-Vlachs and other Vlachphone tribes were not big enough and are too much divided to be a majority in there....besides most of them claim to be Greeks anyway...
4. Seleukeia will remain Greek for good, it was at some point part of Armenia Minor/Armenian Principalities, but that was out of the need and does not mean all population of Armenia Minor/Cilica was Armenian because it was not...
5. I must apologize to my remarks about Albanian culture, they were not Greeks and I found out that besides Albanian being mentioned in 1081 in official Byznatine correspondence there is also mention of Albanian "kingdom" created in 1200s by Normans and later in 1380s when it is mentioned Byznatine Emperor made a pact with Albanian chieftains/princess against the Normans and that the Principality of Arberia/Albania was founded...with Karl Topia as it's ruler(we also hear of his son, I believe it is his son, Gjergj/George Topia) so we have more than enough references to Albanians as separate people from Greeks and others.

The Bulgarian and Berber rissues are still very much open...

@Enravota as you know the problem is in tags.

So anyway the question is - Should Volga Bolgars be Cuman or Turkish?

 

[Semi-Lobster]

The Volga Bulgarians should be Cuman, they where mainly influenced by Kipchaks as opposed to 'Turks'

 

[unmerged(31117)]

Thank's for putting Albanian back in, when I heard it was going to be removed I was getting a bit depressed. It's good you did research into it rather than do what Paradox seems to have done and lumped them together with the greeks.

I've pointed exactly what you said before in a post on this subject earlier funnily enough and it was I who convinced you lot not to get rid of the Albanians.

Moorish should represent the dominant culture of Spain/North African which were of the same cultural block in this time period. The original drawing of the border of Moorish/Arabic culture is sound, given that the Arabs, though the ruling class at the time of the invasion of Spain centuries before the time frame, had enculturated by the period of the game. There is plenty of reference at the time of the invasion in Islamic sources of the Berbers and Arabs as seperate people and of rivalry and competition between the two ethnic groups. Moorish should represent a hybrid between Arab and Berber Cultures (much as English repesents a hybrid of Normon and Saxon) and I probably think that Moors should have a mixture of Arabic and Berber names to represent this fusion.

Bulgarians should definately only represent the inhabitants of the Balklands, using one tag for both given that they had, had little contact with one another for centuries and would have been culturally as far apart as at least English and Germans by the period of the game.

 

[unmerged(27913)]

OK here are my thoughts...I am again coming back to the fact that Cumans, Pechenegs and all other Turkish/Turkic tribes were closely related. Now if we follow the logic behind the uniting all the Uralic(Finnic) tribes into one tag then it would just be logical that we do the same with Pechenegs and Cumans with Turkish tag especially since these Turkish tribes were really mixed and were made up of different Turkic tribes with one being more dominant then the other.

The thing is that I really find it unfair that Cumans and Pechenegs are separately represented while Bolgar, Seljuks, Oghuz, Khazars etc are not....so IMO we should merge them. That way we would get two "dark culture" tags and we could use one for separate Kurdish tag just to make sure.

Besides Cumans and Pechenegs would still be represented int he game as ther would be 'Tribe of Pechenegs' and 'Tribe of Cumans' in the region...the only difference would be that when you take a look at province info or a character info the culture would say "Turkish". And of course Turkmens, Pechenegs, Oghuz and Cumans would remain Pagan.

 

[Semi-Lobster]

OK here are my thoughts...I am again coming back to the fact that Cumans, Pechenegs and all other Turkish/Turkic tribes were closely related. Now if we follow the logic behind the uniting all the Uralic(Finnic) tribes into one tag then it would just be logical that we do the same with Pechenegs and Cumans with Turkish tag especially since these Turkish tribes were really mixed and were made up of different Turkic tribes with one being more dominant then the other.

The thing is that I really find it unfair that Cumans and Pechenegs are separately represented while Bolgar, Seljuks, Oghuz, Khazars etc are not....so IMO we should merge them. That way we would get two "dark culture" tags and we could use one for separate Kurdish tag just to make sure.

Besides Cumans and Pechenegs would still be represented int he game as ther would be 'Tribe of Pechenegs' and 'Tribe of Cumans' in the region...the only difference would be that when you take a look at province info or a character info the culture would say "Turkish". And of course Turkmens, Pechenegs, Oghuz and Cumans would remain Pagan.

Can't really argue there, the Pechenegs and Cumans getting their own tag while other Turkic tribes do not, does not seem very fair. To be fair though my opinion on this isn't to important since my knowledge on Turkic tribes is limited. The idea of simply having the different Turkic tribes as a political divison rather then an ethnic one is probably the most accurate representation of the situation possible.

 

[Calgacus]

The Canary Islands

Have the Canaries been given any thought at all? Contrary to the game, the Canary inhabitants were not arab/berber and never came into (known) contact with Islam in the game period. Being stone-age tribesmen who weren't colonized by any Eurasian civilization until the end of the period, they'd have to have a series of special rules and require the concept of terra incognita as with EU II. Now, don't ask me where one could get a list of names from, I dunno. But something has to be done about the Canaries.

 

[Calgacus]

I'd just like to say I am happy with the Southern Slav tag. I'm not convinced that splitting Croats and Serbs from Bulgarians (and Macedonians?) is a priority when Vlachs, Albanians, Berbers, Bretons, Syrians, Canareans, Sardinians, Copts and Kurds are absent. Certainly, splitting Serbs from Croats is just silly; the only difference between the two being religion. Although I don't know much about Western Slavic languages, I do know that Polish and Czech were once labelled as "common languages" (for political reasons admittedly), and so separating Bohemian and "Slovak" at this stage smacks of anachronism. In fact, they should get rid of some of the anachronisms currently in the game, like Portuguese/Castillian, Irish/Scottish (the only purpose being served in the naming patterns) and maybe even Dutch (well, Flemish should be there at least).

 

[Calgacus]

Second, Breton culture is one of those. The culture - correctly - is portrayed as non-Frankish (Gaelic, actually, which is EU2's erroneous combination of all the Celtic peoples into a single culture, but that is an argument for elsewhere) in EU2, yet in CK it is Frankish? That makes no sense at all. It is in fact a remnant Celtic culture - like Welsh, Irish, and Scottish, although distinct from all of those (as they are from one another). There is a free "celtic" tag which could easily be used for Breton. The necessary alterations can be made in less than ten minutes, excepting the addition of a list of suitable names.

Bretons, Cornish and Welsh were all called "Brittones" is contemporary Latin. They spoke almost identical languages in the period, each one obtaining it's cultural indentity purely in relation to geographical isolation from the others. Therefore, (esp. if the developers can partially detatch naming patterns from culture) they should all be "British", followed by a Kingdom of Britannia replacing Wales but requiring 66% the 6 Breton provinces, Cornwall and Wales. For 1066, British culture should be placed in Brittany, Cornwall, Devon, Cumberland, and possibly Hereford and Shrewsbury [like Devon (British and English) and Cumberland (British, Scottish, English and Scandinavian), population mixed, but prolly Britons still in a majority].

(Similarly, English/Saxon should be the language/culture of Berwick and probably Lothian, a point shamelessly receiving little comment on these boards .. being the one of the best known facts in medieval scottish history).

Likewise, if naming patterns can be divorced from culture, Scottish and Irish should both be either "gaelic" or "scottic." With Ulster Gaelic having more in common with Gallovidian Gaelic than Munster Gaelic, etc, etc, this only makes sense. Even in the 14th century Scottish and Irish were referred to as a "common language" by both the Scottish king Robert de Brus and the Irish noble Domnall O'Neill, the former referring to the Scottish and Irish people as "nostra nacio" (our nation).

Anyways, with this Cornish, Breton are both brought in whilst freeing up another tag. Great all round.

 

[Calgacus]

CRIMEAN GOTHIC: (or just Goth)
Would be nice to represent the Crimean Goths as well, as Crimean Gothic remained the dominant spoken language and practiced culture in Crimea well into the 16th century. Not only is the language East Germanic (and therefore a completely different branch of Germanic) but it's written in Cyrillic characters, and culturally they're closer to Khazars, Cumans and Greeks. Would be nice to use one of those unused cultures here.

Can you give me some evidence for this? I had always thought these Goths were a myth, simply classicizing sources using the word "Goth" for either later German settlers, or other people ... and NOT the "eastern Germanic" people of Theodoric, Alaric and Fritigern. I would be very much grateful if you'd post a link to the "Cyrilic Gothic" you speak of ...

 

[yourworstnightm]

I have read somewhere about these crimean goths too, however their nobles were greek, so their culture should be greek.

 

[yourworstnightm]

Bretons, Cornish and Welsh were all called "Brittones" is contemporary Latin. They spoke almost identical languages in the period, each one obtaining it's cultural indentity purely in relation to geographical isolation from the others. Therefore, (esp. if the developers can partially detatch naming patterns from culture) they should all be "British", followed by a Kingdom of Britannia replacing Wales but requiring 66% the 6 Breton provinces, Cornwall and Wales. For 1066, British culture should be placed in Brittany, Cornwall, Devon, Cumberland, and possibly Hereford and Shrewsbury [like Devon (British and English) and Cumberland (British, Scottish, English and Scandinavian), population mixed, but prolly Britons still in a majority].

(Similarly, English/Saxon should be the language/culture of Berwick and probably Lothian, a point shamelessly receiving little comment on these boards .. being the one of the best known facts in medieval scottish history).

Likewise, if naming patterns can be divorced from culture, Scottish and Irish should both be either "gaelic" or "scottic." With Ulster Gaelic having more in common with Gallovidian Gaelic than Munster Gaelic, etc, etc, this only makes sense. Even in the 14th century Scottish and Irish were referred to as a "common language" by both the Scottish king Robert de Brus and the Irish noble Domnall O'Neill, the former referring to the Scottish and Irish people as "nostra nacio" (our nation).

Anyways, with this Cornish, Breton are both brought in whilst freeing up another tag. Great all round.

Yeah, yeah, and the northern scots were probably still picts. We're back at same argument I had about Scandinavia. I think there's no idea to reduce the number of christian cultures, some areas like Cornwall could have welsh cultures, but let's not exaggerte, anyway the culture should be the culture of the elite.

 

[Semi-Lobster]

Calgacus, next time can you put all you posts together into one big post rather then 3 small posts? It kinda takes up space.

The Canary Islands: The Guanche are only one province and considering what we’re having to do to get cultural tags I'm sure we'll never see a seperate Guanche culture. As for the Guanche themselves, many historians say that Guanche was a Berber language from the little of the language they can find left.

Southern Slavic: Finellach can tell you, he's much, much more knowledgeable about this region then myself.

Celtic stuff: First off we are splitting Breton from the other Brythonic languages because they had become by 1066, different then the other Brythonic peoples. They had been influenced by French but also because they had different names then the Cornish or Welsh.
I assume when you mention Cumberland to be Brythonic as well you are referring to the Picts? While I agree with the hypothesis that they where Brythonic I'm unsure if they where a distinct people by 1066. I’ll have to ask a friend about this as he has much better resources on this then myself. Also, I’ll ask him about Hereford and Shrewsbury aswell. I'm pretty sure he will have an answer for these questions. Until then though if you can bring some sources of your own, (books, websites etc.) then please show them, I need more book recommendations!

As for Saxon being in Southern Scotland, I'm unsure, while I agree wwith what you're saying, we currently are using a very generic 'Scottish' tag to represent the Highland and the Lowlands which, although having things in common, where to different places and two different people inhabiting those areas. The different though was not exceptionally different later, not as much in 1066. Once again, there's probably people more knowledgeable on this subject then myself so I shall leave this to them but this is my opinion.

Likewise, if naming patterns can be divorced from culture...

Sorry, but it can't

yourworstnightm: Some people could consider the Crimean Goths to be sufficiently ummm... Greek...ised to be considered Greek while others insist that they where still distinct, one thing is certain though, we don't have many tags

As for population representing the elite, how are you supposed to raise an army of 'elite' peasants if you chose certain options? I think culture is based off the general population when you look at the way that power, income and manpower are already divided by class in the game.

 

[Enravota]

Besides Cumans and Pechenegs would still be represented int he game as ther would be 'Tribe of Pechenegs' and 'Tribe of Cumans' in the region...the only difference would be that when you take a look at province info or a character info the culture would say "Turkish". And of course Turkmens, Pechenegs, Oghuz and Cumans would remain Pagan.

I would rise again my offer for a Kipchak culture in the north and Turk in the south. afcourse if a tag can be spared . and I think someone should start keeping track on the tags count them and start redistributing them, so we will know what is available and possible.