Should there be Roman culture on the map in the new DLC?

[Thure]

Like Captain Frakas correctly stated the term frankish lost it's ethnical meaning at least one century before charlemagne and could refer to the noble of old frankish descent as well as the romance burgher in Neustria or the low german in modern belgium (proto-dutch) and even the high german in rheinland (franconian).

3. Charlemagne was the first king in Europe since the collapse of the Roman Empire to become king of two peoples and to style himself as such (king of the Franks and of the Lombard). As far as I know, there is no king who styled himself as King of the Franks, the Burgundian, the Visigoth, the Normans, &c.

I was thinking after Charlemagne, I have a hard finding the exact source where I found this .
But I at found that at least some of the kings of franks added in their title king of the Aquitaines as shown here: http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liste_des_ducs_d'Aquitaine (french only) after the integration of the kingdom of Aquitaine in the Kingdom of France.

So for me it confirms that the occitans were not considered franks like the their northen cousins as for the other ones i guess that it's not a big stretch that it could have been used too but I keep looking for evidence.

Who speaks about the Occitans...? I just mean that Germanic Franks and Romance Franks shouldn't be the same ingame. Charlemagne was never Romance Frankish. And ingame they must have another name. Do you want to call them both Frankish? That would be confusing.

 

[smeggy]

While most of your post is correct, it's absolutely ridiculous to say that Latin died in 300s. Maybe in fringe regions there began to be strange dialects at that time, but it wasn't until very far into late antiquity that Latin truly disappeared as a common language.

Maybe you're both right. Latin has been there in many forms. Old, Vulgar, Educated, Church, etc.

 

[IsadorBG]

Frankish refers to the Germanic tribe, which ruled over Romance and Germanic populations (part of the latter groups were Franks).

See Frakas and my former post. This not correct.

All the Langues d'Oil are referred to as Old French, in the same way as there is Old German and Old Dutch too, all of which basically are groupings of dialect groups.
In 769 they, whether they actually made up the majority of the population (as in northern modern day Belgium, southern part of the Netherlands, the Rhineland, Franconia etc.) or were the elite would certainly still be regarded as Frankish.
Eventually as Frankish developed into Old Dutch, Old German and Old French, that gradually wasn't the case anymore and that certainly wasn't how they viewed the other.

This is highly disputed. The language that is modern french took root to the dialectal langues d'Oil from Ile de France. It was not the parent language of other dialect like Norman, Picard of burgundian even tough they were all mutually intelligble. Sometimes in french we make the distinction between Francilien and Français to make the langue d'oil Old French (Vieux Français) otherwise it can be easily confusing.

Titulature wasn't everything though, the Saxon Ottonian dynasty also still used the style king of the Franks (a heritage from East Francia). In West Francia, which evolved into France the style only changed from king of the Franks to king of France in 1190 (IIRC).

Okay it was just an exemple not an important part of my argumentation annyway.

Not in 769, but by the time of 'the oaths of Strasbourg' in 842 it would be a good starting point to split the Franks into French by melting pot with the local Romance population north of the Loire, German and Dutch.

Agan what is frankish (latin) in the game is not the only ones that deserves to be called french. French refers to the vassals of the king of france meaning an occitan peasan of the toulouse are is as much french that the french speaking parisian. The french speaking part of the HRE are not french and some could argue the same for the english part (altough they were de jure subject of the french king).
The surpa-culture of EU4 is what is correct.

Just like Bosniak and Bosnian means different things so were franc (frankish) nd français (french) at that time.

Who speaks about the Occitans...? I just mean that Germanic Franks and Romance Franks shouldn't be the same ingame. Charlemagne was never Romance Frankish. And ingame they must have another name. Do you want to call them both Frankish? That would be confusing.

Not necessarily you can call the romance Frankish "Franc" using the french term or the 769 Frankish: Franks. However they were not German only they were some sort of Supra culture.

Yes Charlemagne never spoke French or rather it's ancestor (Roman). He never spoke frankish too, He spoke a high german language transmitted by his high german mother.
Charlemagne himself is an exemple on how the Frankish of that time lost it's purely ethnical meaning.

 

[Thure]

See Frakas and my former post. This not correct.



This is highly disputed. The language that is modern french took root to the dialectal langues d'Oil from Ile de France. It was not the parent language of other dialect like Norman, Picard of burgundian even tough they were all mutually intelligble. Sometimes in french we make the distinction between Francilien and Français to make the langue d'oil Old French (Vieux Français) otherwise it can be easily confusing.



Okay it was just an exemple not an important part of my argumentation annyway.




Agan what is frankish (latin) in the game is not the only ones that deserves to be called french. French refers to the vassals of the king of france meaning an occitan peasan of the toulouse are is as much french that the french speaking parisian. The french speaking part of the HRE are not french and some could argue the same for the english part (altough they were de jure subject of the french king).
The surpa-culture of EU4 is what is correct.

Just like Bosniak and Bosnian means different things so were franc (frankish) nd français (french) at that time.



Not necessarily you can call the romance Frankish "Franc" using the french term or the 769 Frankish: Franks. However they were not German only they were some sort of Supra culture. Yes Charlemagne never spoke French or rather it's ancestor (Roman). He never spoke frankish too, He spoke a high german language transmitted by his high german mother.
Charlemagne himself is an exemple on how the Frankish of that time lost it's purely ethnical meaning.

Please answer me this question (I asked it many times):
How would you call Germanic Franks and Romance Franks? They need a different name. And no. Charlemagne most likely spoke Frankish and not Old High German (but we haven't any source for one of this, right?). We never said they were German. We say they were Germanic. This is a difference.

 

[DominusNovus]

It is worth noting that the language spoken by Pepin and his son Charlemagne was considered by themselves to be too unintelligible to the Germans east of the Rhine that they had to import Anglo-Saxon missionaries in their efforts to convert the Germans.

 

[IsadorBG]

Please answer me this question (I asked it many times):
How would you call Germanic Franks and Romance Franks? They need a different name. And no. Charlemagne most likely spoke Frankish and not Old High German (but we haven't any source for one of this, right?). We never said they were German. We say they were Germanic. This is a difference.

769 Franks (Romano-Germanic)
Franks (Latin) : Frankish/Francs

Satisfied ?

And atleast Wikipedia clearly says Charlemagne spoke Rhenish Franconian (Old High German) as an native language and Latin.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charlemagne#Language

 

[Thure]

769 Franks (Romano-Germanic)
Franks (Latin) : Frankish/Francs

Satisfied ?

And atleast Wikipedia clearly says Charlemagne spoke Rhenish Franconian (Old High German) as an native language and Latin.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charlemagne#Language

Wikipedia isn't really exact on this topic. Rhenish Franconian was part of Old Frankish and not Old High German. (just sometimes Frankish is included in Old High German. But wikipedia listed even Langobardic as Old HIgh German...)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Frankish

And Franks wouldn't work because the game use adjectives. Norse is at least an adjective. Franks wouldn't be an adjective.

 

[Ruwaard]

@ Isador BG: I hope you aren't serious, Rhenish Franconian is one of the Frankish dialect groups, in German it's called Rheinfränkisch and in Dutch Rijnfrankisch. Ripuarian /Ripuarisch Franconian seems likely too.
Charlemagne still spoke Frankish, a Frankish dialect which would end up contributing to Old German, but at the same time it was close to neighbouring dialects which ended up contributing to Old Dutch. After all it's a dialect continuum.

I also disagree with your comment on Old French, since a similar thing can be argued about Old German, which also groups Franconian, Allemanic and Bavarian.
I'm also fully aware that other Old French dialect groups like Norman and Picard had a cultural impact of their own.

 

[IsadorBG]

Wikipedia isn't really exact on this topic. Rhenish Franconian was part of Old Frankish and not Old High German. (just sometimes Frankish is included in Old High German. But wikipedia listed even Langobardic as Old HIgh German...)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Frankish

And Franks wouldn't work because the game use adjectives. Norse is at least an adjective. Franks wouldn't be an adjective.

@ Isador BG: I hope you aren't serious, Rhenish Franconian is one of the Frankish dialect groups, in German it's called Rheinfränkisch and in Dutch Rijnfrankisch. Ripuarian /Ripuarisch seems likely too.
Charlemagne still spoke Frankish, a dialect which would end up contributing to Old German, but at the same time it was close to neighbouring dialects which ended up contributing to Old Dutch. After all it's a dialect continuum.

I also disagree with your comment on Old French, since a similar thing can be argued about Old German, which also groups Franconian, Allemanic and Bavarian.
I'm also fully aware that other Old French dialect groups like Norman and Picard had a cultural impact of their own.

Are you sure about this because it seems the rheinfranconian cited in wikepedia is the ancestor of modern rhein franconian.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhenish_Franconian

it maybe a descendent of Frankish but from the little I know about germanic language, Frankish belong to the west german group (ancestor of dutch) along with Saxon and Frisian and not in the high german group.

769 frankish
870 Francs then ?

for the Old French well it's not that important it is just to remember that Modern French was also a dialect of its own and the other dialecrs were not patois as said oftentimes. /

 

[Thure]

Are you sure about this because it seems the rheinfranconian cited in wikepedia is the ancestor of modern rhein franconian.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhenish_Franconian

it maybe a descendent of Frankish but from the little I know about germanic language, Frankish belong to the west german group (ancestor of dutch) along with Saxon and Frisian and not in the high german group.

769 frankish
870 Francs then ?

for the Old French well it's not that important it is just to remember that Modern French was also a dialect of its own and the other dialecrs were not patois as said oftentimes. /

Yes Rhine Franconian was Frankish. Just a small part of Frankish became Dutch. Low Frankish (like Low German). But Frankish was a own group. Even if wikipeda listed it as Old High German. Low Frankish was just a dialect of Old Frankish. Frankish itself was not closer to Saxon then to German.

And here, wikipedia listed Frankish and Langobardic as Old High german:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_High_German#Dialects

 

[IsadorBG]

Yes Rhine Franconian was Frankish. Just a small part of Frankish became Dutch. Low Frankish (like Low German). But Frankish was a own group. Even if wikipeda listed it as Old High German. Low Frankish was just a dialect of Old Frankish. Frankish itself was not closer to Saxon then to German.

And here, wikipedia listed Frankish and Langobardic as Old High german:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_High_German#Dialects

Umm actually this article says that their are quite a lot of germanic dialect that could be considered frankish sometimes low german sometime high. and that was already the case in the time of charlemagne wich only convince me more that the franks were not an ethnical group if they ever were one.

 

[Captain Frakas]

I was thinking after Charlemagne, I have a hard finding the exact source where I found this .
But I at found that at least some of the kings of franks added in their title king of the Aquitaines as shown here: http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liste_des_ducs_d'Aquitaine (french only) after the integration of the kingdom of Aquitaine in the Kingdom of France.

So for me it confirms that the occitans were not considered franks like the their northen cousins as for the other ones i guess that it's not a big stretch that it could have been used too but I keep looking for evidence.

Yes, Aquitainians (Those who are now called, since the nineteenth century, Occitans) where rather seen as being Romano-Gallic by Franks. Visigoths had a lesser influence on the Romano-Gallic society south of the Loire river (except in Toulouse) and the nobility there kept memories of their senatorial roots and Frankish never really integrated it into their realm even if it was conquered since Clovis. Saxons, Frisians, Alamans, Bavarians, Gascons and Breton were also seen as being peoples of dependencies of the kingdom of the Franks while not being part of the Frankish land proper: they were conquered by Franks during Merovingian times but did get an autonomy thanks to the weakness of last Merovingian kings. They have their own princes [first man] who were as such equals of the prince of the Franks even if he had to pay him, sometime, tributes.

I have to say, however, that the meaning of kingdom was not the same back then than it is understood now and it was normal for contemporary that kingdoms may be part of kingdoms. That is because there was (at last) two meaning of "kingdom". Clovis was king of the Franks, king of a people not of a land, like many barbarian kings, but when the emperor Anastasius, granted him the title of consul and recognized him as king, he became, in the name of the Emperor, king of a territory with all its inhabitants, in Gaul. Hence there was one kingdom of the Franks (the people) but there was also territorial kingdoms inside the kingdom of Franks in Neustria, in Austrasia, in Burgundy, in Aquitaine. Each king and each inhabitant had the consciousness of being part of the same kingdom, united by its common origin.

Who speaks about the Occitans...? I just mean that Germanic Franks and Romance Franks shouldn't be the same ingame. Charlemagne was never Romance Frankish. And ingame they must have another name. Do you want to call them both Frankish? That would be confusing.

There was romance speaking Franks in Neustria (lets call them Salian Franks) and tudesque speaking Franks in Austrasia (lets call them Ripuarian Franks), hence you cannot say that in 769 Franks were German and it changed after that. In 769 there was both romance and german Franks... The divide is not in a time scale but in a geographical scale.

Pippinids/Carolingian were an Austrasian family.

 

[Ruwaard]

@ Captain Frakas: again the Salian Franks were not all romance speaking nor were they limited to Neustia, there were Germanic Frankish speaking Salian Franks in Austrasia. For instance Germanic Salian Frankish is an ancestor of Low Frankish.

No one is saying the Franks were German, they were Germanic. Some kept speaking their Germanic Frankish tongue, which also evolved further. Furthermore Germanic Frankish was split by the changes, like the High German Consonant shift, which affected all the West Germanic languages in a varying degree. Old Low Frankish, like Old Saxon wasn't affected, whereas Old Middle and High Frankish, Alemannic and Bavarian were.
Other Franks (many of whom initially Salian Franks) which ended up in more densely populated Romance speaking regions would eventually merge with their new subject Romance speaking population.
The Germanic and Romance Frankish divide was to some extant geographical, but those initially Germanic Franks in those Romance areas didn't change over night from being Germanic to Romance, that was a gradual process.

 

[Ciccillo Rre]

Mmmh. What about something like this?

1: you have Italic. It's a blanket term for the variety of mostly homogeneous dialects of vulgar Latin, none of them firmly established or well set yet.
2: there is mostly Langobardian nobility in the kingdom of Italy (which, I hope, will be called Longobardia or Lombardia if the owner is Langobardian).
3: Charlie will probably set his sight on the region, but if he doesn't, Italic under Langobardians will melting-potize into Lombardian around the year 900-1000.
4: if, instead, Charlie does his thing, Italic will become Italian around the same period. Might become Sicilian if in the Kingdom of Sicily and ruled by Greeks/Normans/Arabs? Probably.

I've proposed something similar in the previous pages. My proposed "blanket name" is "Romanic".

 

[WeissRaben]

I've proposed something similar in the previous pages. My proposed "blanket name" is "Romanic".

Works too, yes.

 

[mudcrabmerchant]

It's probably safe to divide up Latins into cultures based on broad geographic regions. Gallo-Romans in Gallia, Visigothic works for Spain because of the close integration between the old Visigothic nobility and the native Latins, I suppose Italian works for Italy but perhaps 700's Italian should be distinguished from the later culture. And there were definitely surviving Romance speakers in Pannonia and Africa, but it's a question of whether or not they formed the majority in any county by 769.

As far as names go, I don't think we have any extensive Romance writing before the 9th century, and so even if the spoken language had still significantly diverged from Classical Latin by this point, it probably wouldn't be inaccurate to use Latin names for characters of these cultures, seeing as it's far easier than using linguistically reconstructed early Romance names, and the Latin forms would probably have been the main form in which these characters would have seen their own name in writing.


It looks like there's two ways to handle the Germanic ruler/Latin ruled setup:

Separate the cultures, and keep the Germanic culture restricted to the ruling class of characters, and a few provinces. Melting pot events later merge the cultures, or the Germanics simply culture shift to the local Romance;

Or, have the two as part of a mixed culture from the get-go.

It looks like Paradox has gone with the second option, though I would have preferred separation in Italy and probably France as well. It's just weird what they've done in Italy - separate pockets of Lombard culture separated by Italian, even though both of these regions will shift to Italian culture anyway.

 

[Ruwaard]

@ mudcrabmerchant: Langobardia Major, the territories of the Lombard kingdom in Northern Italy, and Langobardia Minor, the Lombard duchies of Spoleto and Benevento, were separated from each other by a territory stretching from Rome to Ravenna.

 

[mudcrabmerchant]

I'm not debating the spread of Lombards historically, I'm talking about how they represent the history in-game - the end result of it all will be an Italian blob, so it makes more sense to just leave the provinces Italian and keep Lombard restricted to the regional nobles.

 

[Captain Frakas]

@ Captain Frakas: again the Salian Franks were not all romance speaking nor were they limited to Neustia, there were Germanic Frankish speaking Salian Franks in Austrasia. For instance Germanic Salian Frankish is an ancestor of Low Frankish.

I've never said the contrary but Thure ask for an in-game name, hence, you'll have to accept some approximation.

The Germanic and Romance Frankish divide was to some extant geographical, but those initially Germanic Franks in those Romance areas didn't change over night from being Germanic to Romance, that was a gradual process.

It was a gradual process who was pretty munch ended since a good time in 769. Fact is that there was no more any distinction between "Romano-Gallic" and "Franks" in Neustria: all were called Franks, considered as such and followed the same law.

 

[sreckom92]

I don't think that Woman cultuwe is despewatly needed.