I'm not an expert on matrilineal marriages. I didn't imagine they happened very often in medieval Europe. Did they?
matrilineal marriage, how common were they in the middle ages?
- Thread starter Pope Pius V
- 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.
I teach medieval history and I can't think of a single example... save maybe the marriages of Empress Zoe in Byzantium, sort of.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zoe_Porphyrogenita
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zoe_Porphyrogenita
It's a good thing to have that kind of choice: We can alter the history to avoid racism unrealistically in other Paradox games, it's only normal if sexism can also be avoided in this one.
I'm not sure how often, but there were marriages that were on the condition that the husband would assume the name and arms of the father-in-law. They'd be used to preserve inheritances that were to X and the heirs of his name.
I agree it's a good thing we have the choice, for gameplay reasons, but censoring or unrealistically altering historical realities for no other reason than to appease modern sensibility is dumb.
This personal question and I understand if don't but where do you teach?
Hearts of Iron series omit BIG events that we're not allowed to speak here, in order to appease modern sensibility. I believe Paradox already has made their choice about the matter so it's only sensible to carry that over, instead of selectively avoiding some kinds of discrimination while harboring some.
I can't imagine it being all that common. Even in the game there are only a fraction of times where a matrilineal marriage would be sought after, and you probably won't find a powerful man who is up for it.
Really the Big H event was not in there at all, like pertending the civil war never happen.
That's partly because they could get in a great deal of trouble for putting those events in their games (the HOI series would not even be allowed in large parts of Europe if, say, the Holocaust was in it). Anyways, it isn't particularly sexist- but it *is* useful to have the option, just in case.
Which means you might need a generation or so of commoner blood. I think the royal families of Europe would have sooned ate their own shoes.
Was there another half to this post? I can't tell what you're referring to.
That most likely has more to do with certain laws in parts of Europe (similar to the exclusion of the actual Nazi flag) rather than an attempt to avoid offending anybody (as Paradox probably could have found a tasteful way to represent it without dwelling on it, if they felt the need to). Isn't the Rape of Nanking in the game?
Besides, there's plenty of racism in Paradox games, it's just usually going on in the background. And Sengoku is loaded with sexism, because it's historically accurate. Matrilineal marriages are a gameplay mechanic, not an appeal to modern sensibilities.
If it was done here and there, I don't see why it wouldn't be allowed. Not being able to recreate what happened at all is way worse than being able to recreate something that rarely happened.
A lot of things that happened in real life are impossible in Paradox Games, though.
Well there might not have been many matrilinear marriages (save Basques, some Turkic peoples and Mongols) but there was always the possibility of doing that. Not sure this option in CK2 has to do with sexism but it makes the game more realistc and I am happy with it.
Having a female leader would just be game over if there wasn't matrilineal marriages.
Oh, but they're really useful for getting talented advisors to your court. In CK1 advisors where all teenage girls... here they're some unimportant dudes married to your second cousins.