As a bottom line, indeed, I'd like to pont out that there is a strong correlation between culture and language in our modern nation states. That should not be projected back to the medieval period
Apologies for yet another digression, but I cannot resist the temptation to reply to this and other points made by Classicist.
(1) Since the word ‘culture’ carries a lot of extra baggage, I will call ‘CKulture’ what I think should be modeled in the game. I believe that at least some degree of language similarity should be a necessary condition for CKultural identity (Though not a sufficient condition – I too, like anyone else, reject the strict equivalence between language and culture). That is, two characters/provinces should not belong to the same CKulture unless they are supposed to speak sufficiently similar native languages.
(2) How much similarity is sufficient? If we cast the net too wide, then we’d have to say that Magyars and Finns could belong to the same culture after all—which is far-fetched. If the similarity is too narrow, then even minor dialects would reflect cultural differences—which is more than we want. I’d just say two languages are sufficiently similar when their speakers could somehow understand one another. This is still vague, but we need not be more precise than that, for CKulture is itself a vague thing.
(3) The above is, at least, how I rationalize and role-play the opinion penalty due to wrong culture. I like you less because you don’t speak my language. This is also how I can make sense of mentors’ changing the culture of their mentees: somehow the idiom of your foreign educator displaces that of your parents, and becomes your first language.
(4) I believe that the correlation between culture and language was strong even well before the formation of modern nation states. I agree with Classicist’s source, Hobsbawm (1996), that that the emergence of standardised official languages was encouraged by the formation of nation states—clearly, the linguistic landscape of the Middle Ages was not as homogenous as that of the post-Napoleonic era. However, my view is not as anachronistic as Classicist think it is. I will not argue for this, though, but just cite the example of Dante Alighieri. Book I of
De Vulgari Eloquentia states that
locutio (alongside
mores and
habitus) is a characteristic of the cultural patrimony of the Italian people. In other words, Dante claims that the Italian vernacular is a distinctive element of the culture of Italy. Was Dante a proto-nationalist well head of his time (as some have claimed)? I don’t believe so.
(5) Having said that, I concede that back in the Middle Ages, the feudal elite did not place as much importance on linguistic identity as the lower classes did. However, this is not so much because the elite must have had a different concept of culture. Rather, they had different priorities that led them to regard social status as more salient than cultural affinity. I think this is well represented in the game by the fact that the opinion penalty due to wrong culture is comparatively low (it would be much higher in nation states, or proto-nations, ruled by foreigners)
(6) I do not believe that CKulture should factor in social rank and status anyway. These are already represented by other means, such as title, claims, and the very fact of being a playable character, as opposed to, say, Baldrick the dung-gatherer.
(7) On synchronic language variation: Classicist asks me if I would apply a linguistic criterion of cultural identity to what he calls the ‘dialect continuums’. As a matter of fact, I would. Given stricter criteria of language similarity, I think we could define localized regional cultures or ‘micro-cultures’ . I understand, that this is goes well beyond the scope of Paradox games (and sufficiently accurate linguistic data is probably lacking anyway, especially in the early Middle Age). Maybe more fine-grained cultures could be something for Europa Universalis 6?
(8) On diachronic language variation: Classicists objects that linguistic change and culture change have largely different causes. In my opinion, cultural changes do not have clearly identifiable causes; rather, they mostly are ‘epiphenomena’ or side effects of other types of changes, including, crucially, changes of the linguistic sort. How much linguistic change is enough to warrant a change of culture? Not a single and localised phonological shift, obviously. But, by virtue of a slow process of accretion, enough linguistic change will eventually correlate to a distinctly different culture. I have no idea how the game could plausibly model this, though. Unfortunately, the game mechanics is ill-suited to simulate the evolution of cultures through time.
