What if Albanian is removed from South Slavic and instead placed in the Byzantine culture group alongside Greece and former ERE peoples?
- 1
- 1
Kosova should be Albanian culture
- Thread starter DarkLordMack
- Start date
-
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.
Heh South/Eastern Europe sure is a funny place then. Also I wonder how many pseudo cultures there are in South/Eastern Europe.
I dont think that would be a good idea since greeks and albanians hate eachother but then again who in the Balkans doesnt hate everybody?
After the fall of Yugoslavia, every region is now its own culture.
- 1
Ok guys. I did the research and this is 100% historically accurate.
For the 1444 start date and following dates, the inhabitants of Albania and Kosovo were of homo-sapien orrigins.
Therefore, based on my research I suggest, no! I insist!!! That the culture be changed to Human.
Edit:
A also suggest that for paradox's future release of Europa cavmansallis that this region be changed to Neanderthal.
For the 1444 start date and following dates, the inhabitants of Albania and Kosovo were of homo-sapien orrigins.
Therefore, based on my research I suggest, no! I insist!!! That the culture be changed to Human.
Edit:
A also suggest that for paradox's future release of Europa cavmansallis that this region be changed to Neanderthal.
- 5
- 1
Pseaudo cultures:Montenegrin,Bosniak,Macedonian.(at least the ones with actuall countries)
Mutual relations:
Dislike:
Croats vs Serbs vs Bosniaks
Croats vs Slovenese
Serbs vs Albanians
Greeks vs Albanians
Macedonians vs Albanians
Greeks vs Macedonians
Everyone vs Bulgarians(i swear bulgaria has rampant backstabbing syndrome-2 balkan war,1 world war,2 world war to name the recent ones)
Like:
Serbs+Greeks
Serbs+Macedonians
Serbs+Montenegrins(in the obsessive boyfriend way(we will be together forever,nobody else!)
Croats+Montenegrins(its a wierd relationship since we dont much care for them but we dont want them in serbia)
Bugaria is forever alone apart from the reich that pops up every 50 years.
Albania is forever alone forever apart from america and thats just an alliance of american convinience but ocasionally the italians have been fairly friendly(as occupiers).
Slovenes are more like pseudo croato-italo-austrian hybrids,i cant describe them any better,its like everyone tried to assimilate them and did a half-assed job of it leaving the result.
Bosniaks face the detrimental issue of both serbs and croats thinking they are nothing more than serbs and croats with an identity crisis,apart from turkey no real friends and with turkey no usefull ones.
Hope it helps better understand the balkans.
- 6
- 1
Huh the only thing I didnt knew was the Croats vs Slovenese one, but what you said sums up everything also you forgot how everybody "loves" turks.
Bosniaks are not a pseudo culture. You might dislike that particular name, or dispute what their name in general should be, but i assure you they are, and have been for centuries, a genuine culture.
Nope, Serbs dont like Montengrins at all. Serbs like Serbs in MNE. "Montenegris" (or Dukljani or Milogorci) is the anti-Serbian political current in MNE.
Croats and Slovenes dont genuinely dislike each other. The whole thing is about the time when Croatia was trying to enter the EU, and Slovenia was already in. So Slovenes made di** moves to try to (ab)use the opportunity of being able to blackmail Croatia about their ascension into EU.
In other words today its mostly a small sea border dispute; Slovenes are trying to snatch a stretch of sea so that they can boost their fishing industry or something like that.
Last edited:
- 1
Turks really arent in europe and havent been a noticable factor in a century so i ignored them,i also ignored serbian russophilia or croat germanophilia.
Bosniak could at most be a regional difference like a dalmatian,slavonian,vojvodian etc.
And even then we would have people in herzegovina claiming to be different at well.
Bosniaks in and off themselfes have no reason to be seperate apart from being muslim.
All the people from istria to morava are one and the same with the only difference being religion,croats are catholics,serbs are orthodox and bosniaks are muslim,i have been in all 3 countries extensively and have interacted plenty with all of them,differentiating them is like differentiating an italian from sicily,from rome and from venice.
The 3 languages are almost indentical,i can understand a guy from sarajevo or belgrade easier than some of our northern dialects.
The reason i give them less priority for nationhood than croats or serbs is that the croats or serbs are 100% their predecesors,and im discounting turkish influence since most of the ottoman administration was retired janissaries that were taken from the region anyways compleating a loop.
If you take a german and make him follow shinto will he magically become japanese?
Im probably in the minority currently but to me yugoslavia was the only logical nation here,centuries of arguing over superficial intentities havent produced anything apart from problems.
Bosniak could at most be a regional difference like a dalmatian,slavonian,vojvodian etc.
And even then we would have people in herzegovina claiming to be different at well.
Bosniaks in and off themselfes have no reason to be seperate apart from being muslim.
All the people from istria to morava are one and the same with the only difference being religion,croats are catholics,serbs are orthodox and bosniaks are muslim,i have been in all 3 countries extensively and have interacted plenty with all of them,differentiating them is like differentiating an italian from sicily,from rome and from venice.
The 3 languages are almost indentical,i can understand a guy from sarajevo or belgrade easier than some of our northern dialects.
The reason i give them less priority for nationhood than croats or serbs is that the croats or serbs are 100% their predecesors,and im discounting turkish influence since most of the ottoman administration was retired janissaries that were taken from the region anyways compleating a loop.
If you take a german and make him follow shinto will he magically become japanese?
Im probably in the minority currently but to me yugoslavia was the only logical nation here,centuries of arguing over superficial intentities havent produced anything apart from problems.
- 2
Thats where we get into murky waters. You have areas that have traditional toponym names. So Serbs living in Montenegro have been called by other Serbs (and mostly everyone else) "Montengrins", because that makes sense right? Well, about 20 years ago an anti-Serbian political current developed in MNE, so now "Montengrins" is no longer a toponym, but a political/cultural statement/identity. Serbs in Bosnia used to be called "Bosnians" (by Serbs and everyone else). Then today's Bosniaks tried to push for "Bosnian" identity (because they were trying to preserve Bosnia in its borders), which naturally made Serbs hate that name, and now Serbs in Bosnia are either "Bosnian Serbs" or just "Serbs". "Bosnian" is basically a derogatory term for Serbs in Bosnia, and they get mad when you call them that (well some, some naturally dont care one bit).
A thing to watch out for now is the emerging "Vojvodinian" identity. Because believe it or not, yet another toponym name for Serbs living in northern Serbia, is now in the middle of a process of establishing itself as a genuine culture as well.
Its ridiculous. Almost as if someone (from abroad) was trying to purposely do that
wink wink- 4
- 1
.png){kind=avatar}
To make things more simple:
Croats, Serbs, Bosnians = same people
Macedonians = floatant slavic mass, basically mix of Serbs and Bulgarians
Albanians = chechenya/dagestan thinking they are Illyrians*
Bulgarians = Turkic tribe + slavs
Greeks = Greeks
There are in fact a lot of suggestions that they came from present day chechenya/dagestan to balkans due to preassure from mongols/turks. In fact, first records of them from around 12th century state that there is around 100 families that live in the mountians and they grow cattle. Further more, there is an area of chechenya called Albania, and a lot of cities in Albania don't have names that originate in Albanian language, yet, they claim to be illyrian.
You can spin these things any way you want to serve your purpose. A nation is defined as a group of people with common history and sense of identity. As someone already pointed out: Albania didn't exist as a state in 1444, a large chunk of it wasn't even inhabited by Albanians, Skenderbeg himself had a Serbian mother, and his family, Kastrioti, were in fact Greeks.
You can spin these things any way you want to serve your purpose. A nation is defined as a group of people with common history and sense of identity. As someone already pointed out: Albania didn't exist as a state in 1444, a large chunk of it wasn't even inhabited by Albanians, Skenderbeg himself had a Serbian mother, and his family, Kastrioti, were in fact Greeks.
- 2
- 1
It's easiest to go by this way:
1. Everyone and their dog is his own culture
2. Group these according to language, now we have:
-Yugoslavs
-Bulgarians
-Slovenes
-Macedonians (debatable)
3. Split them along religion, you get this:
-Serbs (Orthodox Yugoslavs)
-Croatians (Catholic Yugoslavs)
-Bosniaks (Sunni Yugoslavs)
-Slovenes
-Bulgarians
-Macedonians
Everything else, like Montenegrin is garbage and made by foreigners in their divide and conquer attempts
Though not historically perfect either, that may make more sense than being in the Slavic group.
Heres another fun fact since we are digging so deep into it.
After the turks and greeks had their little war over who can rule anatolia they agreed to a population transfer to avoid future conflicts.
The only problem is that for the transfer they used religion,so in effect you ended up with loads of orthodox turks in greece who didnt know the language and vice verse with muslim greeks in turkey.
So if anyone ever wondered why some greeks are so dark and some turks(especially on those TV soap operas) so white,thats the reason.
After the turks and greeks had their little war over who can rule anatolia they agreed to a population transfer to avoid future conflicts.
The only problem is that for the transfer they used religion,so in effect you ended up with loads of orthodox turks in greece who didnt know the language and vice verse with muslim greeks in turkey.
So if anyone ever wondered why some greeks are so dark and some turks(especially on those TV soap operas) so white,thats the reason.
- 2
Interesting. Do they have historic ties? I know linguistically Albanian is its own language group in the indo european language family, not that culture and language are the same thing. I assume the grouping is all due to gameplay reasons so DPX probably had a reason for that decision. I only suggest byz cultural group due to proximity, if the slavic one is too troublesome.
Ironically it does harm people though: themselves. Because of some dumbass nationalist leaders in control of the FYROM, the entire country is held back in international politics (for example, being veto'd from joining the EU). And of course you've got all the tax money being spent on pointless North Korea style propaganda, which further harms their already not so rich country.
The best thing long term for macedonia would probably be 1 of 2 options:
1.They can use historical justification to re-attach themselfes to serbia and get access to a larger economy and more diplomatic power as well as access to serbian security forces for any future internal problems like that albanian revolt or the immigration crisis.
2.Accept an ethnic partition where the majority albanian areas are attached to albania while the rest go to bulgaria.
The state in its current form isnt really viable long term and inventing special reasons for its existance isnt a good long term solution.
Another problem that could be fixed in such a way is kosovo if it was simply partitioned properly,but given how fast its going bankrupt it may rejoin serbia eventually anyways.
1.They can use historical justification to re-attach themselfes to serbia and get access to a larger economy and more diplomatic power as well as access to serbian security forces for any future internal problems like that albanian revolt or the immigration crisis.
2.Accept an ethnic partition where the majority albanian areas are attached to albania while the rest go to bulgaria.
The state in its current form isnt really viable long term and inventing special reasons for its existance isnt a good long term solution.
Another problem that could be fixed in such a way is kosovo if it was simply partitioned properly,but given how fast its going bankrupt it may rejoin serbia eventually anyways.
But again, and i think youre missing my point somehow, all that, its their own business. And nobody's else.
If they want to raise statues and have their EU membership vetoed, let them. In 20 years theyll change their minds. Or not.
- 1