New Cultures

[Kljunas]

This is the "Mongolian Dilemma" in a nutshell. Which is why I am hopeful the cultural mechanics do get a major overhaul. Let me ask you this- Was there a real "Italian" identity at any time during the expanded CK2 timeline? Or perhaps, the idea of "Italian" identity did not really take hold until after?

Did Venetians think of themselves as Italian? I do not think they did. Nor Lombards or any other.

There was no Italian identity, but it looks like Lombards are in the Germanic group in the expansion. And there definitely is a difference between Germans and Latins. I just wouldn't want Northern Italy to remain Germanic for the whole game every time.

 

[Thure]

Ok, let's all agree on one thing: no Romance culture is properly represented in the game, all of them are reflections of today's views. Romance people in the Middle Ages formed a linguistical and cultural continuum which was in direct continuity with the late Roman Empire (something you can still see today if you are familiar with Romance dialectology, especially in parts of the Romania such as Italy and Southern France). All of the local languages were dialects of the non-standardized late Vulgar Latin; hence all the Latin and Iberian cultures that we see in game reflect labels that we associate to partitions of that continuum using modern lenses and concepts.

Having said this, you are wrong. The Lombards as a distinct group associated with the Germanic invasion (and as I think is conceived in the cultural map that we seen, given that it's associated to the areas politically controlled by the "Langobardi") ceased to exist shortly after the Frankish invasion, for they only constituted local elites which quickly assimilated into the new Frankish dominators. Eventually, however, "Lombardy" became a geographical notion, associated to a specific region in Northern Italy which is today officially the largest one (population-wise) of the country. The "Lombard league" takes its name because it united cities in that area, and the "Lombards of Sicily" were people from that area that Emperor Frederick II invited to move to the southern island. They retained nothing of the old Langobardi, specifically nothing of the language (I am talking of what is today known as "Lombard dialect" of the Italian language).

The Lombards in 798 are already romance speaking...

There was no Italian identity, but it looks like Lombards are in the Germanic group in the expansion. And there definitely is a difference between Germans and Latins. I just wouldn't want Northern Italy to remain Germanic for the whole game every time.

As I said... this would be wrong. Langobards should be in the Italian group. They were not Germanic speaking at this time anymore.

 

[Ciccillo Rre]

There was no Italian identity, but it looks like Lombards are in the Germanic group in the expansion. And there definitely is a difference between Germans and Latins. I just wouldn't want Northern Italy to remain Germanic for the whole game every time.

Me neither. Please let us all agree that back in the times there hardly was even a shared German, or Castilian, or Occitan identity as we conceive them now.

 

[Ciccillo Rre]

The Lombards in 798 are already romance speaking...

This is true, but I was pointing out that associating the "Langobardi" to the so-called "Lombard of Sicily" is just plain wrong.

 

[Kljunas]

Me neither. Please let us all agree that back in the times there hardly was even a shared German, or Castilian, or Occitan identity as we conceive them now.

I totally agree. "Italian" is only meaningful to contrast with non-Latin cultures. You can't argue whether a province should be Italian or Occitan, but you can argue whether it should be Italian or Greek.

 

[Zolotaya]

... The Lombards as a distinct group associated with the Germanic invasion (and as I think is conceived in the cultural map that we seen, given that it's associated to the areas politically controlled by the "Langobardi") ceased to exist shortly after the Frankish invasion, for they only constituted local elites which quickly assimilated into the new Frankish dominators...

I never stated the (northern) Lombards should be within the Germanic family. I actually agree with Thure: Lombards at this time already were Romance people. Just the names were Germanic. There language wasn't Germanic anymore (similiar to the Normans in France). I also agree with Romanfe that the southern Lombards should be split from the northern.

Now, as to your assertion that they (the northern Lombards) were subsumed into a "Frankish" culture very rapidly, we do disagree on this. I'll make an edit shortly with my argument shortly - I want to put this together slowly so that I'm sure we are communicating correctly and not misunderstanding each other.

 

[Ciccillo Rre]

Now, as to your assertion that they (the northern Lombards) were subsumed into a "Frankish" culture very rapidly, we do disagree on this. I'll make an edit shortly with my argument shortly - I want to put this together slowly so that I'm sure we are communicating correctly and not misunderstanding each other.

Fine, I'll wait for this.

 

[Zolotaya]

Fine, I'll wait for this.

Sorry for the wait:

Let's set some agreed foundations: First thing that we should agree on, is that at the time of the dlc bookmark, the struggle for independence for the Lombards was in full swing, not only between the Franks but also the Pope, the ERE and that this struggle was influenced by outside elements such as the Bavarian diplomatic maneuvers and the Franks campaigning elsewhere. Our disagreement is on the power and influence of the Lombards in the time period after this.

Secondly let us agree that between 773-774 the kingdom of Lombardy was finally defeated and re-organized on Frankish principles.

We both seem to agree up to this point.

At this point we start to disagree: I consider the fact that Charlemagne kept the Lombardi legal structure intact and viewed the two kingdoms (Frank and Lombardi) in terms more of a personal union than a political union as key to understanding that the assimilation was not short or rapid. I also point to the fact that it took about 80 years to fully resolve the political control in favor of the Frankish nobility in the north and during this time due to Papal-Imperial conflict of appointing Dukes and counts the remnants of Lombardi nobility were still in the fight.

It really was not until Otto II in 898 gave the Duchy of Spoleto to the Margrave of Tuscany where it remained united until Matilda's reign that all of the northern Lombardi political shenanigans ended.

 

[Ciccillo Rre]

Sorry for the wait:

Let's set some agreed foundations: First thing that we should agree on, is that at the time of the dlc bookmark, the struggle for independence for the Lombards was in full swing, not only between the Franks but also the Pope, the ERE and that this struggle was influenced by outside elements such as the Bavarian diplomatic maneuvers and the Franks campaigning elsewhere. Our disagreement is on the power and influence of the Lombards in the time period after this.

Secondly let us agree that between 773-774 the kingdom of Lombardy was finally defeated and re-organized on Frankish principles.

We both seem to agree up to this point.

At this point we start to disagree: I consider the fact that Charlemagne kept the Lombardi legal structure intact and viewed the two kingdoms (Frank and Lombardi) in terms more of a personal union than a political union as key to understanding that the assimilation was not short or rapid. I also point to the fact that it took about 80 years to fully resolve the political control in favor of the Frankish nobility in the north and during this time due to Papal-Imperial conflict of appointing Dukes and counts the remnants of Lombardi nobility were still in the fight.

It really was not until Otto II in 898 gave the Duchy of Spoleto to the Margrave of Tuscany where it remained united until Matilda's reign that all of the northern Lombardi political shenanigans ended.

I agree on everything. What I am not sure is the extent to which the Lombard identity among the nobility remained so distinct after the Frankish conquest by the time of the Old Gods bookmark.

But the thing is, that since I adhere to the "provincial culture as the majority culture of the peasants" point of view, I find it hard to accept that half of Italy painted in violet map. It would be different if, for example, Italy were divided into more subcultures belonging to the same Romance group, of which Lombard - established in the north but not in the south, at least at the provincial level - were one. The rulers of Benevento and Spoleto could be possibly Lombard in this case. Or if we went through the route of dividing Italy into Lombards and Romans and have some sort of melting pot later on (which would be a stretch in many ways).

 

[Zolotaya]

I agree on everything. What I am not sure is the extent to which the Lombard identity among the nobility remained so distinct after the Frankish conquest by the time of the Old Gods bookmark.

But the thing is, that since I adhere to the "provincial culture as the majority culture of the peasants" point of view, I find it hard to accept that half of Italy painted in violet map. It would be different if, for example, Italy were divided into more subcultures belonging to the same Romance group, of which Lombard - established in the north but not in the south, at least at the provincial level - were one. The rulers of Benevento and Spoleto could be possibly Lombard in this case. Or if we went through the route of dividing Italy into Lombards and Romans and have some sort of melting pot later on (which would be a stretch in many ways).

This is why I took time on my last post - we seem to be closer to each other's view than we thought earlier. It is more of a matter of degree of agreement than disagreement. The Italian (or as I prefer to rename it: Latium) Romance group should include both a north Lombardi group and a south Lombardi group as well as the main "Latin" sub-group. I dislike using "Roman" here.

I agree that the rulers (after 774) of Spoleto and Benevento should be Lombard (at least through the TOG bookmark), however at the new bookmark date there should be more than that.

It is my held belief that the nobility used the "Lombardi" elements of their background, legal system and cultural identity to help keep their independence from the other "Frankish" nobility. As such, the Lombardi culture in CK2 becomes the melting pot culture (in the north only). In many ways, Matilda even in 1066 considered herself more Lombardi in culture than anything else.

 

[Ashagar]

Yah, I always figured groupings of Italian, Spanish and so forth was often acceptable breaks from reality given Venetians would have seen themselves as Venetians not Italians while people from Rome and the surrounding area never stopped viewing as romans, indeed they even made two attempts during the middle ages to bring back the glory days of Rome that failed, though the attempted restoration of the republic at least managed to last roughly 49 years in spite of both the pope, the Holy Roman Emperor and their own bickering.

 

[Chef Boyardee]

Really hope they add Sogdian.

 

[Ciccillo Rre]

Yah, I always figured groupings of Italian, Spanish and so forth was often acceptable breaks from reality given Venetians would have seen themselves as Venetians not Italians while people from Rome and the surrounding area never stopped viewing as romans, indeed they even made two attempts during the middle ages to bring back the glory days of Rome that failed, though the attempted restoration of the republic at least managed to last roughly 49 years in spite of both the pope, the Holy Roman Emperor and their own bickering.

Uhmmm... I do not think that the inhabitants of Rome really felt that sense of continuity; that episode - and the whole Cola di Rienzo attempt - was more a political façade of propaganda than anything else.