Grand Culture Mod (Thread 2: Continuation of Finellach's)

[Veldmaarschalk]

So, that's the 1066 map up. I'm exhausted :wacko:

Anywiehow, we need to free at least one light tag. We could do this by either

a) Getting rid of one of these cultures (the order reflects their standing in my head):

i) Carantanian
ii) Moravian
iii) Albanian
iv) Samoyed
v) Norman
vi) Portuguese

or b)

1) Recombining the cultures in the Balkans using fewer tags
2) Merging the Scandinavians (2 free tags)
3) Merging Bohemian and Moravian
4) Merging the Britons
5) Merging the Gaels

or c)

Taking the Turks back to two tags, and assigning moving a current light culture to a dark one.

I need consensus soon on a method. If no consensus emerges I will make the decision myself in order to get on with the mapping.

Consensus will be hard to achieve, but I think most people seem to agree that the Scandinavians can be merged. at least we haven't heard much objections about it. Not in this thread and not in the other.

Removing the Norman culture would be weird, since what culture would we give de Hauteville's in Apulia. Frankish? That would look weird.

 

[unmerged(21937)]

Can you give me some idea of which provinces you think the Samoyeds should get for each scenario?

I doubt I can give good views what Permians and other non-Sámi peoples should have. However for Sámi:

In 1066:
Definetly: Kemi, Kola, Kajanaborg, Karelen
Maybe: Savolaks, Österbotten

In later scenarios:
Definetly: Kemi, Kola, Kajanaborg, Karelen

Österbotten was quite sparsely populated by Finns in around 1000 AD, but that's exactly where the Finnish inhabitation primarily expanded during CK era. Savolaks is rather tricky, since Finnish inhabitation was in rather small part of it, but there's little evidence of Sámi living there, except the deduction that Sámi most likely were living in areas where Finns didn't.

The Finnish inhabitation in Karelen province was only on the coast of Lagoda even in 1500, so it's imo wrong to make whole vast province Finnish based on that.

I'll give more info Sweden later, but there surely was Sámi living in Lappland and Västerbotten in all scenarios, perhaps also in more southern provinces too, question just is whether or not Swedish settlements were predominant there.

 

[Calgacus]

I doubt I can give good views what Permians and other non-Sámi peoples should have. However for Sámi:

In 1066:
Definetly: Kemi, Kola, Kajanaborg, Karelen
Maybe: Savolaks, Österbotten

In later scenarios:
Definetly: Kemi, Kola, Kajanaborg, Karelen

You see, the Sami are not the same as the Samoyed. The Sami, as Finellach has said, are no more different (linguistically at least) from the proper-Finns, than Mordvins, Permians and Cheremsians. I have the Samoyed in the north-east 5 provinces of "Russia."


Do you think they (either the Sami or Samoyed) deserve a tag of their own?

 

[unmerged(27913)]

These are the tags I used for the additional cultures:

none - Kurdish
W.Slavic - Moravian
S.Slavic - Bulgarian
Abghazian - Berber
E.Slavic - Serbian
Ugric-Baltic - Croatian
Norse - Wendish
Celtic - Breton
Iberian - Vlach
Byzantine - Albanian
Lappish - Carantanian

Anyway I suggest that you remove Norman. Altough Normans are my all time favorites I think it's a bit too much for them to have a totally separate culture. These people were Frankish/French...they spoke French and had the same names as French.

Also a good thing would be to remove the Saxon and replace it with English(should be renamed to Anglian for better medieval sounding). It's rather unfair that English would have two tags...I mean others had melting pots as well....
Anyway the Saxon names should remain in current Saxon/Anglian characters such as Leofricsson brothers etc. but they would be English/Anglian and their children(or more correctly their children's children) would have more "Normanic" names....this way it would be equally successful simulation of 'english melting pot' since this event starts triggering around 1090 anyway.

Also I still think that the best would be to entirely remove Cumans and Pechenegs and merge them with Turkish tag and name Turkic...although Turkish would be fine as well.
These tribes were were much similar to each other and if this game didn't deal with history from a european point of view we might made them more specific but this way it's pretty much pointless.

Same goes with Finnic tribes...yes Samoyeds belong to totally different branch but are they really that important? I reckon they are not.

Also I thank the person which posted that map with distribution of Arabas and Berbers in muslim spain and I ask you - WHERE THE HELL WERE YOU BEFORE!!!

 

[Calgacus]

These are the tags I used for the additional cultures:

none - Kurdish
W.Slavic - Moravian
S.Slavic - Bulgarian
Abghazian - Berber
E.Slavic - Serbian
Ugric-Baltic - Croatian
Norse - Wendish
Celtic - Breton
Iberian - Vlach
Byzantine - Albanian
Lappish - Carantanian

Thanks.

Same goes with Finnic tribes...yes Samoyeds belong to totally different branch but are they really that important? I reckon they are not.

You should see my last post.

Also a good thing would be to remove the Saxon and replace it with English(should be renamed to Anglian for better medieval sounding). It's rather unfair that English would have two tags...I mean others had melting pots as well....

I agree with you about the melting point thing. I wish they hadn't introduced it. Anyways, Saxon is a good name. "Anglian" is too artificial. If some people get confused about it then it's just tough for them.

Also I still think that the best would be to entirely remove Cumans and Pechenegs and merge them with Turkish tag and name Turkic...although Turkish would be fine as well.
These tribes were were much similar to each other and if this game didn't deal with history from a european point of view we might made them more specific but this way it's pretty much pointless.

I have no problem with that; I just don't want to label the whole steppe and Greater Bulgaria Kipchak when it wasn't.

 

[unmerged(27913)]

Oops a correction....

'none' tag was used for Copts and I used the removed Pecheneg tag for Kurds. The version I posted was before we decided to introduce Copts as well....personally I though that was not a such good idea.

I have no problem with that; I just don't want to label the whole steppe and Greater Bulgaria Kipchak when it wasn't.

Actually you might want to know I strongly opposed to this, but Semi-Lobester and the others were pretty much convincing or should I say very persistant.

What I wanted to do is to merge Cumans and Pechenegs with Turkish tag as I find it rather stupid to have Cumans and Pechenegs but not Oghurs, Khazars, Ottomans, Seljuks, etc.

 

[Calgacus]

What I wanted to do is to merge Cumans and Pechenegs with Turkish tag as I find it rather stupid to have Cumans and Pechenegs but not Oghurs, Khazars, Ottomans, Seljuks, etc.

If you hadn't generated so much opposition to the Turkish-Turkic idea, it'd be a whole lot easier. Anyways, have any name suggestions?

I've inclined to bin Saxon now actually. Lots of people really like it, but the dynasty system doesn't support it. If you play a game with overthrows the Normans, you get gfuys with Saxon first names and French or Normanized dynasty names/ Besides, Edward the Confessor was already experimenting Normanization beforehand. My only worry is that the tag is very popular ... like the Norman tag.

 

[unmerged(21937)]

You see, the Sami are not the same as the Samoyed. The Sami, as Finellach has said, are no more different (linguistically at least) from the proper-Finns, than Mordvins, Permians and Cheremsians. I have the Samoyed in the north-east 5 provinces of "Russia."

Well, I think some division between the nomadic Finnics (Sami, Permians) and agricultural Finnics is proper, since the groups were culturally quite different.

Also there is a difference in voices used between Sámi and Finnish languages, which leads to different spellings in names. For example Sámi spellings use astrophopes and lots of "b", "d" and "g", which are nearly unknown in traditional Finnish names. On the other hand Sámi don't use "p", "t", "k", which are very common in Finnish names. While foreign-imported names are more similiar between Sámi and Finnish names, more traditional names appear as completely different breed. So related languages, sure, but so are Swedish and German. Sámi separated from Finnish around 1000-2000 BC.

Anyways, I'm just thinking that if you'd be adding Samoyedic, it would be more practical to use it represent both Samoyeds and nomadic Finns, than just Samoyeds.

Mordvins are a problem of course, but unless you can get lists of Mordvin names, the argument would be against adding it then.

 

[Calgacus]

Well, I think some division between the nomadic Finnics (Sami, Permians) and agricultural Finnics is proper, since the groups were culturally quite different.

Also there is a difference in voices used between Sámi and Finnish languages, which leads to different spellings in names. For example Sámi spellings use astrophopes and lots of "b", "d" and "g", which are nearly unknown in traditional Finnish names. On the other hand Sámi don't use "p", "t", "k", which are very common in Finnish names. While foreign-imported names are more similiar between Sámi and Finnish names, more traditional names appear as completely different breed. So related languages, sure, but so are Swedish and German. Sámi separated from Finnish around 1000-2000 BC.

Anyways, I'm just thinking that if you'd be adding Samoyedic, it would be more practical to use it represent both Samoyeds and nomadic Finns, than just Samoyeds.

Mordvins are a problem of course, but unless you can get lists of Mordvin names, the argument would be against adding it then.

Well, Byakhiam, I understand the logic, and this was the default setup. Language, after all, is not the only consideration. I'll wait and see how the final discussion on to-be-removed culture turn out.

 

[unmerged(21937)]

Ah, 1066 map is now perfectly coloured, with brown Arabs.

However, 1187 and 1337 maps have black arabs and other dark colours. I hope they do in your end too or something is very weird.

If they do, I hope they appear with more reader-friendly colours in later versions.

 

[Calgacus]

British Isles

1066

1187

1337

I'm slightly uncormfortable with the idea of Norwegians in so much of Scotland, but I'll go with it to simulate the Scotto-Norse ethnic diversity in the western sea area. For 1337, it is a slight misrepresentation to have English for Dublin, Fife, Mar and Glamorgan, but no more so than suggesting the English lord controlled the whole area; besides, English presence in Scotia, Deheubarth and Ireland has to be simulated. They can be taken to simulate the Anglo-Irish and proto-lowlanders.

 

[unmerged(21937)]

In 1066 both Lothian and Berwick are English
In 1187 only Berwick is English
In 1337 Berwick, Lothian and Fife are English

I'm believing Scottish Lothian in 1187 is bug.

EDIT: And Welsh in Hereford and Shrewsbury in 1066?

 

[Calgacus]

In 1066 both Lothian and Berwick are English
In 1187 only Berwick is English
In 1337 Berwick, Lothian and Fife are English

I'm believing Scottish Lothian in 1187 is bug.

Nope. Gaelic expanded into Lothian in the period 1066-1187.

EDIT: And Welsh in Hereford and Shrewsbury in 1066?

There were Welsh throughout the march area, and there were still Welsh on the English side of the border until recently. Hereford contains a bit of Wales proper, as it is drawn. I don't think it is unrepresentative to give to the Welsh 2/5ths of the march country, after all, CK provinces are not drawn village by village. In the case of Scotland, the majority of Fife (as it is drawn) was Gaelic, and Fife itself was governed by its native lord. But there were English on the fringes of the other Scottish provinces, and I'm trying to represent that.

 

[Semi-Lobster]

So, that's the 1066 map up. I'm exhausted :wacko:

Anywiehow, we need to free at least one light tag. We could do this by either

a) Getting rid of one of these cultures (the order reflects their standing in my head):

i) Carantanian
ii) Moravian
iii) Albanian
iv) Samoyed
v) Norman
vi) Portuguese

Carantanian: No, to different from the other Slavic cultures
Moravian: I'm lukewarmly for it, I just can't see any difference between them and Bohemians as they had the same literary, liturgical, and linguistic background, the only difference was some sort of residiual sense of belonging to the former 'Greater Moravia' 100 years ago.
Albanian: They where an emerging people as of 1066 and just starting to differentiate from the Greek Romans.
Samoyed: I just don't like Samoyed, how about we have 'Finnish' and 'Uralic', where Finnish represents Finnish, Karelian, Estonian and Mordvin while 'Uralic' represents Lappish and Samoyed?
Norman: there would riots in the streets if this was axed!
Portugese: If you ask a Spaniard, he would say that the Portugese language, even embryonic form, was still nodifferent from Castillian as any other dialect. A Portugese person would say that the development of Portugese from the 11th to 15th century was a critical time of emergence for the Portugese language and was different from Castillian.

or b)

1) Recombining the cultures in the Balkans using fewer tags
2) Merging the Scandinavians (2 free tags)
3) Merging Bohemian and Moravian
4) Merging the Britons
5) Merging the Gaels

or c)

1) Not going to happen
2) Very little opposition to such a move. It could be useful as the Norse sprite could fit for a lot of potential cultures
3) See above
4) No, the name list would be a disaster
5) Very possible but we'd be left with a sprite that really couldn't be used anywhere else.

Taking the Turks back to two tags, and assigning moving a current light culture to a dark one.

But what 'Dark culture' could we possibly make light? We had a case for Alan because they looked like Georgians who are light skinned. I don't think we would be able to do that again. And I'm quiet happy with 3 turkic cultures, we've wanted a seperate Bolgar tag for months, and now we have one in Oghuric.

I need consensus soon on a method. If no consensus emerges I will make the decision myself in order to get on with the mapping.

Hopefully we won't have to resort to that.

These are the tags I used for the additional cultures:

none - Kurdish
W.Slavic - Moravian
S.Slavic - Bulgarian
Abghazian - Berber
E.Slavic - Serbian
Ugric-Baltic - Croatian
Norse - Wendish
Celtic - Breton
Iberian - Vlach
Byzantine - Albanian
Lappish - Carantanian

Thanks for reminding me, but what do we replace Alan with?

Anyway I suggest that you remove Norman. Altough Normans are my all time favorites I think it's a bit too much for them to have a totally separate culture. These people were Frankish/French...they spoke French and had the same names as French.

Who else could possibly use a Norman sprite? I say we keep Norman, having Franks in Apulia would be just weird.

Also a good thing would be to remove the Saxon and replace it with English(should be renamed to Anglian for better medieval sounding). It's rather unfair that English would have two tags...I mean others had melting pots as well....
Anyway the Saxon names should remain in current Saxon/Anglian characters such as Leofricsson brothers etc. but they would be English/Anglian and their children(or more correctly their children's children) would have more "Normanic" names....this way it would be equally successful simulation of 'english melting pot' since this event starts triggering around 1090 anyway

I'd like it but we would need to include an additional file in the mod to replace the event list, one without the English melting pot events.

Also I still think that the best would be to entirely remove Cumans and Pechenegs and merge them with Turkish tag and name Turkic...although Turkish would be fine as well.
These tribes were were much similar to each other and if this game didn't deal with history from a european point of view we might made them more specific but this way it's pretty much pointless.

I wouldn't say it's pointless, the speration is mainly for the names list in my opinion.

Same goes with Finnic tribes...yes Samoyeds belong to totally different branch but are they really that important? I reckon they are not.

I like my Finnish and Uralic idea to solve this porblem

Oops a correction....

'none' tag was used for Copts and I used the removed Pecheneg tag for Kurds. The version I posted was before we decided to introduce Copts as well....personally I though that was not a such good idea.

I think it was a great idea, mainly because it was my idea. There was a HUGE difference between Copts/Nubians and Arabs, they had a different language, script, names, religion etc.

Actually you might want to know I strongly opposed to this, but Semi-Lobester and the others were pretty much convincing or should I say very persistant.

What I wanted to do is to merge Cumans and Pechenegs with Turkish tag as I find it rather stupid to have Cumans and Pechenegs but not Oghurs, Khazars, Ottomans, Seljuks, etc.

I'll take that as a compliment As for the Turks, I think with the addition of Oghuric we can easily accomadate all the turkic tribes into one of three main bodies.

Well, I think some division between the nomadic Finnics (Sami, Permians) and agricultural Finnics is proper, since the groups were culturally quite different.

Also there is a difference in voices used between Sámi and Finnish languages, which leads to different spellings in names. For example Sámi spellings use astrophopes and lots of "b", "d" and "g", which are nearly unknown in traditional Finnish names. On the other hand Sámi don't use "p", "t", "k", which are very common in Finnish names. While foreign-imported names are more similiar between Sámi and Finnish names, more traditional names appear as completely different breed. So related languages, sure, but so are Swedish and German. Sámi separated from Finnish around 1000-2000 BC.

Anyways, I'm just thinking that if you'd be adding Samoyedic, it would be more practical to use it represent both Samoyeds and nomadic Finns, than just Samoyeds.

Mordvins are a problem of course, but unless you can get lists of Mordvin names, the argument would be against adding it then.

See my Finnish/Uralic proposal I think I can get a Mordvin name list, I live in Ottawa, so I can call the Russian embassy, or we can ask one of our Russian posters to look around. I'm sure we can find something. Then all we have to do is sort out the Russian/Christian names, for the Mordvin names.

 

[unmerged(27913)]

If you hadn't generated so much opposition to the Turkish-Turkic idea, it'd be a whole lot easier.Anyways, have any name suggestions?

Name suggestions? Merge Cumans and Pechenegs with Turkish tag and leave it as Turkish...or if you insist rename it to Turkic.
There shouldn't be two Turkish-Turkic tags IMO.

I've inclined to bin Saxon now actually. Lots of people really like it, but the dynasty system doesn't support it. If you play a game with overthrows the Normans, you get gfuys with Saxon first names and French or Normanized dynasty names/ Besides, Edward the Confessor was already experimenting Normanization beforehand. My only worry is that the tag is very popular ... like the Norman tag.

Well this is not popularity mod. And also everything can pass if you simply explain people that there is barely no difference between Norman and Frankish tag.

Also Saxons were already being "normanized" in 1066(after all game happens with William conquering England) and it would work perfectly if the new children would get more modern english names after 1066. As I said remove Saxon and replace it with English but keep Saxon names. The children will get more modern names and their parents will still have their anglo-saxon names. Also as pointed out you can rename English to Anglian to make it more medieval sounding...IMO Anglian sounds much better than English...but thats me.

 

[Calgacus]

Also Saxons were already being "normanized" in 1066(after all game happens with William conquering England) and it would work perfectly if the new children would get more modern english names after 1066. As I said remove Saxon and replace it with English but keep Saxon names. The children will get more modern names and their parents will still have their anglo-saxon names. Also as pointed out you can rename English to Anglian to make it more medieval sounding...IMO Anglian sounds much better than English...but thats me.

Well, I agree we should ditch Saxon. I will only change my mind if there is significant opposition.

Name suggestions? Merge Cumans and Pechenegs with Turkish tag and leave it as Turkish...or if you insist rename it to Turkic.
There shouldn't be two Turkish-Turkic tags IMO.

OK, Turkish and Turkic it's gonna be.

 

[unmerged(27913)]

Who else could possibly use a Norman sprite? I say we keep Norman, having Franks in Apulia would be just weird.

I don't see what would be so strange...we know that Normans were Frankish thus there is nothing to be strange.

I'd like it but we would need to include an additional file in the mod to replace the event list, one without the English melting pot events.

Nothing like that is needed.

I wouldn't say it's pointless, the speration is mainly for the names list in my opinion.

The names between Cumans, Pechenegs and Turkish tag are in 98% cases the same...if no 99%.

I think it was a great idea, mainly because it was my idea. There was a HUGE difference between Copts/Nubians and Arabs, they had a different language, script, names, religion etc.

If we would have enough tags....with merger of Turkic tribes this would be posibble. The 'none' tag should not IMO be used...there are too much problems with this and we need none tag.

I'll take that as a compliment As for the Turks, I think with the addition of Oghuric we can easily accomadate all the turkic tribes into one of three main bodies.

I'd advise against that. There is no point in doing this.

See my Finnish/Uralic proposal I think I can get a Mordvin name list, I live in Ottawa, so I can call the Russian embassy, or we can ask one of our Russian posters to look around. I'm sure we can find something. Then all we have to do is sort out the Russian/Christian names, for the Mordvin names.

1. There is no such thing as Mordvin culture or names...this name is term devised for two distinct finno-ugric people living there
2. These people were called Volga Finns....I think that speaks for itself...

 

[Calgacus]

Carantanian: No, to different from the other Slavic cultures
Moravian: I'm lukewarmly for it, I just can't see any difference between them and Bohemians as they had the same literary, liturgical, and linguistic background, the only difference was some sort of residiual sense of belonging to the former 'Greater Moravia' 100 years ago.

What would we call the culture?

2) Very little opposition to such a move. It could be useful as the Norse sprite could fit for a lot of potential cultures

It is a big decision, coz anyone can throw in the argument "if we split them, then why not ... ." I will wait for more feedback, esp. from Scandinavians.

4) No, the name list would be a disaster

The name list would be equally problematic in either case.

See my Finnish/Uralic proposal I think I can get a Mordvin name list, I live in Ottawa, so I can call the Russian embassy, or we can ask one of our Russian posters to look around. I'm sure we can find something. Then all we have to do is sort out the Russian/Christian names, for the Mordvin names.

That would be great, if you can do it.

 

[Semi-Lobster]

1066

1187

1337

I'm slightly uncormfortable with the idea of Norwegians in so much of Scotland, but I'll go with it to simulate the Scotto-Norse ethnic diversity in the western sea area. For 1337, it is a slight misrepresentation to have English for Dublin, Fife, Mar and Glamorgan, but no more so than suggesting the English lord controlled the whole area; besides, English presence in Scotia, Deheubarth and Ireland has to be simulated. They can be taken to simulate the Anglo-Irish and proto-lowlanders.

Calgacus is right about the 1066 scenario with the Welsh, what I disagree with his other maps. Welsh remained very vibrant and hardly effected, it only started declining during the time of the Reformation under Henry the VII. Until then, both North and South Wales, where still Welsh. The only exception was the county of Pembrokeshire in Dyfed province in CK. This was the site of 'Little England beyond Wales' which was established in 1282 by Edwards the 1st and remained the ONLY predominatly English speaking region in Wales. Also for Cornwall, in 1187, it should be Exeter that was stil Celtic, not Devon, mainly because where the province is.

I'll leave the Gaelic question to Brian because, well, I tired of typing right now!

 

[Mad King James]

The best reason to go with 'Anglian' instead of 'English' is there are a lot of languages that are west germanic in Britain that are not exactly English (Scots, Kentish, Lallans, etc) but ARE Derivatives of Old Anglian. Thus you can use Anglian all over the place without the least fear of pissing off the Scots.