Posting this again in this forum so I’m hopefully noticed by a developer

[GetTheBread000]

Sorry for being a bit rash last time. This is very personal to me, so I’ll try to avoid being blunt. I would hope a developer would respond to me. I’m herzegovinan and in 2020, as of today the vast majority of Herzegovina identifies as Croat and is catholic. When I saw the the southern of the two provinces in Herzegovina was orthodox, I couldn’t complain because there is a large minority of Montenegrins in the region of Herzegovina. What I don’t understand is why the primary culture, and the culture in Hum is Serbian. Like people today and back then identified as Croatian and catholic. Also the founder of Herzegovina had the first name Stjepan, which is my name, and one of two notoriously only Croatian names(that and tomislav). I have nothing personal against serbs, but when a very well researched company like paradox messes up, especially when it’s where I’m from, I have to point it out. I don’t know how to insert photos so search up the evidence yourself.

 

[MadDoctorScientist]

Well, not a developer, but a Croat I met here pointed out the new DLC has a few changes to Croatia, so maybe they will fix that?
Paradox is really mishandling the Balkan's contemporary conflicts terribly.

 

[Nyrael]

Indeed, there is no reason for Hum (Herzegovina) to be Serbian. It was not only always Croatian, but also a capital of it for a time.

Still, Emperor will change a lot in the Balkans. For importantly, the (Medieval) Bosnian culture is now being added, and Herzegovina will be its own country as well (Bosnia's vassal). I'd wait to see how they handle it there, the new cultural landscape of Western Balkans is much more historical than the old one and includes most of changes I myself have been wanting to see since EU3 days.

 

[PyroMegaManZ]

Whilst I certainly can't claim to be a professor of Balkan history, most of the sources I can find for free on Google Books about Hum in 1444 implies that the population was a majority Serbian, ruled by a man whose title was that of a Serbian Catholic saint, and the other religion that was in the town was the Bosnian Church which was considered heretical by both Catholics and the Orthodox.

 

[Sanguine Caesar]

I’m herzegovinan and in 2020, as of today the vast majority of Herzegovina identifies as Croat and is catholic.

Indeed, there is no reason for Hum (Herzegovina) to be Serbian. It was not only always Croatian, but also a capital of it for a time.

That may be the case today, but ethnic identity in the Balkans has been notoriously fluid over the centuries, and much of the current cultural milieu is the result of two things: migrations which occurred during Ottoman rule, and ethnic cleansing during the war in the 90s. In 1444 the demographics were very different, especially in the Herzegovina area. Zahumlje was just one of several medieval Serbian principalities in the area during the medieval period, and even in Dubrovnik the identity of the Slavic residents was a mixture of Croats and Serbs. The ruler of Herzegovina was a Serbian Voivode serving under the Bosnian king, and even named his holdings "The Duchy of Saint Sava" after the founder of the Serbian Orthodox Church. Furthermore, he backed the construction of several Orthodox churches and monasteries in his land, and even gave tepid endorsements of the Bosnian Church every now and then.

However, none of this is to say that there were no Croats in the area; far from it. As I said before it was very mixed, with regions such as Tropolje around Livno and Tomislavgrad being fiercely Croat/Catholic up to the present day for example. Therefore, I believe Bosnian culture to be the obvious solution as currently it seems to mostly represent the mix of cultural and religious communities which formed Bosnian society back then and even to this day. I tend to think of their treatment of Bosnian being similar to how Transylvanian is currently treated in-game: a regional identity rather than a particular ethnic one. @otaats did a lot of very good work concerning Herzegovina, and I suggest you give his thread a read if you haven't already.

Also the founder of Herzegovina had the first name Stjepan, which is my name, and one of two notoriously only Croatian names(that and tomislav)

I would add Hrvoje to this list.

 

[MadDoctorScientist]

That may be the case today, but ethnic identity in the Balkans has been notoriously fluid over the centuries, (...)

As long as they are careful not to incite bloody havoc between some "overtly patriotic" folks of today, that stands true. Rather explosive place the Balkans, really.

 

[GetTheBread000]

As long as they are careful not to incite bloody havoc between some "overtly patriotic" folks of today, that stands true. Rather explosive place the Balkans, really.

That was my point, I don’t have anything against serbs today, but their ancestors tried to wipe out mine because of that hatred. That’s why I got quite mad about this. What he said is quite logical though.

 

[vaLor-]

That was my point, I don’t have anything against serbs today, but their ancestors tried to wipe out mine because of that hatred. That’s why I got quite mad about this. What he said is quite logical though.

Although i am not serbian myself, nor am I from the balkans, painting croats as the victim is quite strange, considering the ethnic cleansing of serbs conducted by the croatian ustase, of which they are not just croat ancestors but people still alive today(albeit at old age). As such, pinning such a thing as ethnic hatred of croats from serbs when it was conducted on both sides (to a larger extent from croats), is quite a rich statement.

As PyroMegaManZ mentioned earlier in the thread:

Whilst I certainly can't claim to be a professor of Balkan history, most of the sources I can find for free on Google Books about Hum in 1444 implies that the population was a majority Serbian, ruled by a man whose title was that of a Serbian Catholic saint, and the other religion that was in the town was the Bosnian Church which was considered heretical by both Catholics and the Orthodox.

There is logical reason to presume that the population was majority serbian, and could be portrayed as such.

I don't see a reason for bosnia to have its own culture considering throughout history it was a multicultural territory consisting of self-identifying croats and serbs, with its only significant unique identity outside of these being the bosniak muslims, who converted to islam after the EU4 startdate. The current representation accurately shows the situation during the historical period of EU4's timeline.

 

[Romanix90]

That was my point, I don’t have anything against serbs today, but their ancestors tried to wipe out mine because of that hatred. That’s why I got quite mad about this. What he said is quite logical though.

You sure they tried to wipe you out. Didn't you Croats demanded Yugoslavia two times in order to be saved from annihilation, war reparations, territorial loses that you would suffer and so on. Didn't those crazy Serbs accepted both times your offer to create multiethnic, multireligous and so on, Yugoslavia. In a strange way those crazy Serbs tried to wipe you out, while accepting your plea. Bosnia, Herzegovina seems wright as it is which is Serbian. But since you guys worry of ''Great Serbian hegemony'' fear not, in 1.30 Patch Bosnia will be Bosnian. There will be no Sebs or Croats.

 

[Sanguine Caesar]

That was my point, I don’t have anything against serbs today, but their ancestors tried to wipe out mine because of that hatred. That’s why I got quite mad about this. What he said is quite logical though.

This narrative is the result of years of nationalism in the post-Yugoslav public discourse, and is simply false. Before 1918, Serbs and Croats lived for centuries together in relative harmony under both the Ottomans and Habsburgs, with the communities along the Military Frontier (Krajina) being a notable example of this. Even though he said so in a somewhat crass manner, @Romanix90 is correct: Yugoslavia was created completely voluntarily. The Croat and Slovenian delegations approached the Serbian King and requested that all the formerly Austro-Hungarian lands inhabited by Southern Slavs be united with the Kingdom of Serbia, which had just absorbed Montenegro. In fact, the original pan-Slavic movement which sought for the South Slavs to unify was the Croat-led Illyrian Movement in the 19th century.

A lot of the ethnic hatred of today arose from the question over whether the Yugoslav state should be a federation or be centralised around Belgrade, as well as the debate over whether to promote a single Yugoslav identity which obscured old national divisions or to promote each of the national identities as separate but equal. That eventually blew up into the horrors committed by the Ustaše during WWII and the Chetnik retaliations against Croat civillians. This left a deep wound between them that has never truly healed since, and it is important to remember how recent that wound is.

So in short, ethnic rivalries in the region are largely a 20th-Century phenomenon, and the idea that it goes back to the medieval period (when, I might add, the concept of nationhood didn't even exist yet ) is simply a false narrative propagated by nationalists and has little to no basis in historical fact.

 

[GetTheBread000]

Although i am not serbian myself, nor am I from the balkans, painting croats as the victim is quite strange, considering the ethnic cleansing of serbs conducted by the croatian ustase, of which they are not just croat ancestors but people still alive today(albeit at old age). As such, pinning such a thing as ethnic hatred of croats from serbs when it was conducted on both sides (to a larger extent from croats), is quite a rich statement.

As PyroMegaManZ mentioned earlier in the thread:

There is logical reason to presume that the population was majority serbian, and could be portrayed as such.

I don't see a reason for bosnia to have its own culture considering throughout history it was a multicultural territory consisting of self-identifying croats and serbs, with its only significant unique identity outside of these being the bosniak muslims, who converted to islam after the EU4 startdate. The current representation accurately shows the situation during the historical period of EU4's timeline.

This narrative is the result of years of nationalism in the post-Yugoslav public discourse, and is simply false. Before 1918, Serbs and Croats lived for centuries together in relative harmony under both the Ottomans and Habsburgs, with the communities along the Military Frontier (Krajina) being a notable example of this. Even though he said so in a somewhat crass manner, @Romanix90 is correct: Yugoslavia was created completely voluntarily. The Croat and Slovenian delegations approached the Serbian King and requested that all the formerly Austro-Hungarian lands inhabited by Southern Slavs be united with the Kingdom of Serbia, which had just absorbed Montenegro. In fact, the original pan-Slavic movement which sought for the South Slavs to unify was the Croat-led Illyrian Movement in the 19th century.

A lot of the ethnic hatred of today arose from the question over whether the Yugoslav state should be a federation or be centralised around Belgrade, as well as the debate over whether to promote a single Yugoslav identity which obscured old national divisions or to promote each of the national identities as separate but equal. That eventually blew up into the horrors committed by the Ustaše during WWII and the Chetnik retaliations against Croat civillians. This left a deep wound between them that has never truly healed since, and it is important to remember how recent that wound is.

So in short, ethnic rivalries in the region are largely a 20th-Century phenomenon, and the idea that it goes back to the medieval period (when, I might add, the concept of nationhood didn't even exist yet ) is simply a false narrative propagated by nationalists and has little to no basis in historical fact.

Well besides that fact that serbs and Croats were 2 separate sclaveni tribes, Croats came form Carpathian Mountains, and Serbs came from Silesia, there weren’t many differences. Whether or not my ancestors saw themselves as south slav or Croat isn’t what matters. What matters is when my recent ancestors were tortured killed, and harassed by Serbs, and then we are labeled as Serbs in a video game is hurtful. I know the Ustase did terrible things, but very few people supported them, and if you add the Chetnik genocides, communist secret service executions, and the 1990s Serbs have killed way more Croats than Croats killed Serbs, and Croats don’t support Ustase but Serbs support chetniks. Yea my ancestors didn’t think of themselves as Croatian or serb, but it is outright disrespectful. I have so many stories of serbs commuting atrocities against my family who never even supported the Ustase, and I know everyone is going to be like “you are making up excuses” and “don’t get political” but people don’t understand the scale we were harassed on.

 

[GetTheBread000]

You sure they tried to wipe you out. Didn't you Croats demanded Yugoslavia two times in order to be saved from annihilation, war reparations, territorial loses that you would suffer and so on. Didn't those crazy Serbs accepted both times your offer to create multiethnic, multireligous and so on, Yugoslavia. In a strange way those crazy Serbs tried to wipe you out, while accepting your plea. Bosnia, Herzegovina seems wright as it is which is Serbian. But since you guys worry of ''Great Serbian hegemony'' fear not, in 1.30 Patch Bosnia will be Bosnian. There will be no Sebs or Croats.

Buddy how about my great uncles that were publicly executed for being pro democracy. How about my dad that got shot by a serb policeman for wearing a catholic cross. How about all the thousands of boys under 15 that were executed by chetniks because they were forcibly made to fight for something they didn’t support. How about my uncle who got sentenced to a prison camp for 20 years with a 60% mortality rate for HUMMING the american national anthem because he was pro democracy. How about all the baby’s nailed to the walls by Serbs in the 90’s. I’m not mad at you, but people say hurtful senseless things without thinking. I’m also not blaming serbs because I can’t blame a group of people for what a couple of their peers did, but at least don’t call us the people that persecuted us. You don’t call Greeks Turkish, don’t call us serb. Period.

 

[GetTheBread000]

This narrative is the result of years of nationalism in the post-Yugoslav public discourse, and is simply false. Before 1918, Serbs and Croats lived for centuries together in relative harmony under both the Ottomans and Habsburgs, with the communities along the Military Frontier (Krajina) being a notable example of this. Even though he said so in a somewhat crass manner, @Romanix90 is correct: Yugoslavia was created completely voluntarily. The Croat and Slovenian delegations approached the Serbian King and requested that all the formerly Austro-Hungarian lands inhabited by Southern Slavs be united with the Kingdom of Serbia, which had just absorbed Montenegro. In fact, the original pan-Slavic movement which sought for the South Slavs to unify was the Croat-led Illyrian Movement in the 19th century.

A lot of the ethnic hatred of today arose from the question over whether the Yugoslav state should be a federation or be centralised around Belgrade, as well as the debate over whether to promote a single Yugoslav identity which obscured old national divisions or to promote each of the national identities as separate but equal. That eventually blew up into the horrors committed by the Ustaše during WWII and the Chetnik retaliations against Croat civillians. This left a deep wound between them that has never truly healed since, and it is important to remember how recent that wound is.

So in short, ethnic rivalries in the region are largely a 20th-Century phenomenon, and the idea that it goes back to the medieval period (when, I might add, the concept of nationhood didn't even exist yet ) is simply a false narrative propagated by nationalists and has little to no basis in historical fact.

Here I’m going to copy and paste my response to someone who said something similar, beware I am aware of the fact that there was no difference until recently, but here’s why I’m against it.
Buddy how about my great uncles that were publicly executed for being pro democracy. How about my dad that got shot by a serb policeman for wearing a catholic cross. How about all the thousands of boys under 15 that were executed by chetniks because they were forcibly made to fight for something they didn’t support. How about my uncle who got sentenced to a prison camp for 20 years with a 60% mortality rate for HUMMING the american national anthem because he was pro democracy. How about all the baby’s nailed to the walls by Serbs in the 90’s. I’m not mad at you, but people say hurtful senseless things without thinking. I’m also not blaming serbs because I can’t blame a group of people for what a couple of their peers did, but at least don’t call us the people that persecuted us. You don’t call Greeks Turkish, don’t call us serb. Period

 

[GetTheBread000]

Although i am not serbian myself, nor am I from the balkans, painting croats as the victim is quite strange, considering the ethnic cleansing of serbs conducted by the croatian ustase, of which they are not just croat ancestors but people still alive today(albeit at old age). As such, pinning such a thing as ethnic hatred of croats from serbs when it was conducted on both sides (to a larger extent from croats), is quite a rich statement.

As PyroMegaManZ mentioned earlier in the thread:

There is logical reason to presume that the population was majority serbian, and could be portrayed as such.

I don't see a reason for bosnia to have its own culture considering throughout history it was a multicultural territory consisting of self-identifying croats and serbs, with its only significant unique identity outside of these being the bosniak muslims, who converted to islam after the EU4 startdate. The current representation accurately shows the situation during the historical period of EU4's timeline.

I am going to paste a response to someone that said something similar. By the way the Ustase were very unpopular in Croatia, but were popular in Hercegovina, which as a hercegov I am not proud of but is true, also my family weren’t pro Ustase, anyways here it is
Buddy how about my great uncles that were publicly executed for being pro democracy. How about my dad that got shot by a serb policeman for wearing a catholic cross. How about all the thousands of boys under 15 that were executed by chetniks because they were forcibly made to fight for something they didn’t support. How about my uncle who got sentenced to a prison camp for 20 years with a 60% mortality rate for HUMMING the american national anthem because he was pro democracy. How about all the baby’s nailed to the walls by Serbs in the 90’s. I’m not mad at you, but people say hurtful senseless things without thinking. I’m also not blaming serbs because I can’t blame a group of people for what a couple of their peers did, but at least don’t call us the people that persecuted us. You don’t call Greeks Turkish, don’t call us serb. Period

 

[Romanix90]

Buddy how about my great uncles that were publicly executed for being pro democracy. How about my dad that got shot by a serb policeman for wearing a catholic cross. How about all the thousands of boys under 15 that were executed by chetniks because they were forcibly made to fight for something they didn’t support. How about my uncle who got sentenced to a prison camp for 20 years with a 60% mortality rate for HUMMING the american national anthem because he was pro democracy. How about all the baby’s nailed to the walls by Serbs in the 90’s. I’m not mad at you, but people say hurtful senseless things without thinking. I’m also not blaming serbs because I can’t blame a group of people for what a couple of their peers did, but at least don’t call us the people that persecuted us. You don’t call Greeks Turkish, don’t call us serb. Period.

I never called you Serbs. How funny you try to turn things around. I just stated the fact that in that time those people were Serbs, whether they were Catholics or Orthodox. I myself have founded about that on E-books. And as for the crimes you are accusing those damn Serbs, are you sure that Croat Nazis didn't do that during the 2nd WW? Because the crimes you are mentioning pretty much resemble the actions of your ancestors. And if your uncle's were pro-democrat good for them. Why were they against Yugoslavia? Why didn't they support democratisation of Yugoslavia like Croat Ante Markovich did? These are no longer 90s where you can go rampant and accuse damn Serbs what you want and the world will believe it. Times have changed and the world have started looking for your crimes as well. No body here are saying that Serbs are innocent, far from it, but much greater crimes were committed by your ancestors, from WW2 to the civil war in the 90s.

 

[otaats]

Exactly, you are mistaking the forum for a YouTube comment section. You don't just shout out things so blatantly here. There are a lot of people here who are well-versed in history, from every region, and regular flameposting is not going to cut it. Sometimes there are problems, but obscured by a lot of great discussions we had here regarding the Balkans. Don't be a standout. I am aware you are new to the forum and this is basically your first post, so that's why i'm saying this.

Accusing someone's ancestors is a little rough. Serbs here don't do that, Croat's don't, you shouldn't either. Stop being offended for no reason. I am sorry if your family suffered in the past, but you're not the only one with such history here.

PDS are having a good look at Balkan discussions, and they will not hesitate to lock a thread or warn/ban offenders. So, to enable good discussion between every one of us about the Balkans, please keep it polite and not offensive.

 

[Sanguine Caesar]

Accusing someone's ancestors is a little rough. Serbs here don't do that, Croat's don't, you shouldn't either. Stop being offended for no reason. I am sorry if your family suffered in the past, but you're not the only one with such history here.

Agreed. Nobody is trying to minimize or deny your pain or the injustices that happened to your family. We've all been affected by the war in some way: not a single person with family from the Balkans hasn't. Nobody's trying to assign to you or your ancestors an ethnicity with which you do not identify; that's not even remotely the point here. The point is, in order to have the Balkans receive accurate historical representation, we have to put those biases aside and instead focus on objectivity.

The fact of the matter is that this is a game set from 1444-1821; a time when the demographic makeup of the Balkans changed dramatically due to migration. It was during this time that Serbs migrated into Krajina, Albanians arrived in Kosovo, Venetians began colonizing Istria and Dalmatia, Bunjevci moved northwards from Bosnia into modern-day Vojvodina, Czechs settled in Primorje and Slavonia, and Croats migrated to places like Molise and Burgenland. It's impossible to say whether your ancestors were living in Herzegovina at the time or what religion they would have been. Had they been Croats who always lived there? Perhaps. Were they formerly Orthodox Serbs who converted to Catholicism and began identifying as Croats? Maybe. Were they Catholic Croats who migrated as part of a larger wave from somewhere else? Possibly. It's actually quite fascinating to learn how different populations moved and changed during that time, and I really suggest anyone with an interest in the Balkans look at it. With so much migration and such poor record-keeping during those times, it's impossible to know. All we know is that at that time the population in the area, despite being mixed was primarily Serbian in 1444, and so that's what the devs chose to represent it as.

It has nothing to do with trying to obscure Herzegovinian Croats' history or identity, it's simply a recognition of the fact that culture is not stagnant and in many cases was historically quite different from what it is today in many places. As someone who lives in Toronto, should I get upset that the province is represented as Huron in the 1444 start? I'm not Huron, the city today is not Huron. But that doesn't mean that it wasn't so historically, and it also doesn't mean I should get indignant and claim that my community's history is somehow being obscured because the demographics in 1444 do not represent today's reality.

I want to see accurate Croatian representation in the game as much as you do (I mean hell, at least half of my threads on here are about Croatia), but that means representing the region as it was, not how nationalists of today may want to tell us. So I urge you to read more about its history, because there's always more contributions that can be made. You're new to the forums, so there's still a lot of potential for you to have your voice heard if you're really passionate about doing your research and really creating thoughtful and interesting suggestions in the future. Just please don't let this discourage you.

 

[korawit13]

@Sanguine Caesar, I do know you personally. Thank you for your goodness. You are explaining the hot potato of balkanization yugoslavia. People in the Balkan still feel animosity against each others due recent wars and unresolved war crimes sadly. But thank you for your explanation.
@GetTheBread000, I understand how much build grievances over time. Thank you for sharing your experience with us.

 

[GetTheBread000]

Agreed. Nobody is trying to minimize or deny your pain or the injustices that happened to your family. We've all been affected by the war in some way: not a single person with family from the Balkans hasn't. Nobody's trying to assign to you or your ancestors an ethnicity with which you do not identify; that's not even remotely the point here. The point is, in order to have the Balkans receive accurate historical representation, we have to put those biases aside and instead focus on objectivity.

The fact of the matter is that this is a game set from 1444-1821; a time when the demographic makeup of the Balkans changed dramatically due to migration. It was during this time that Serbs migrated into Krajina, Albanians arrived in Kosovo, Venetians began colonizing Istria and Dalmatia, Bunjevci moved northwards from Bosnia into modern-day Vojvodina, Czechs settled in Primorje and Slavonia, and Croats migrated to places like Molise and Burgenland. It's impossible to say whether your ancestors were living in Herzegovina at the time or what religion they would have been. Had they been Croats who always lived there? Perhaps. Were they formerly Orthodox Serbs who converted to Catholicism and began identifying as Croats? Maybe. Were they Catholic Croats who migrated as part of a larger wave from somewhere else? Possibly. It's actually quite fascinating to learn how different populations moved and changed during that time, and I really suggest anyone with an interest in the Balkans look at it. With so much migration and such poor record-keeping during those times, it's impossible to know. All we know is that at that time the population in the area, despite being mixed was primarily Serbian in 1444, and so that's what the devs chose to represent it as.

It has nothing to do with trying to obscure Herzegovinian Croats' history or identity, it's simply a recognition of the fact that culture is not stagnant and in many cases was historically quite different from what it is today in many places. As someone who lives in Toronto, should I get upset that the province is represented as Huron in the 1444 start? I'm not Huron, the city today is not Huron. But that doesn't mean that it wasn't so historically, and it also doesn't mean I should get indignant and claim that my community's history is somehow being obscured because the demographics in 1444 do not represent today's reality.

I want to see accurate Croatian representation in the game as much as you do (I mean hell, at least half of my threads on here are about Croatia), but that means representing the region as it was, not how nationalists of today may want to tell us. So I urge you to read more about its history, because there's always more contributions that can be made. You're new to the forums, so there's still a lot of potential for you to have your voice heard if you're really passionate about doing your research and really creating thoughtful and interesting suggestions in the future. Just please don't let this discourage you.

You make a good point, and I did get to personal. What I was basically trying to say is that Serbia and Croatia were really only geographical and names of countries at the time, since all croats and serb came from the same sclaveni tribe in the Slovak Hungary Poland area, but in that case I feel like they should just reflect the modern population as the 2 groups at that time were the same people, although I cannot argue with your logic. And for @otaats I have no problem with serbs, but just because I don’t blame them for something they cannot control(their ancestors actions) doesn’t necessarily mean I want to identify as one even if I have extremely similar genetics. Either way, you make good points.

 

[MadDoctorScientist]

PDS are having a good look at Balkan discussions, and they will not hesitate to lock a thread or warn/ban offenders. So, to enable good discussion between every one of us about the Balkans, please keep it polite and not offensive.

This deserves to be highlighted.