Slavonic Gods

[Ted Kaczynski]

I don't see any reason why you'd want to be so anal and create a special culture subgroup for every bunch of western slav spearchuckers. Bunch them up as Wends, add an event creating Czech, Pomeranian & Polish cultures based on the 1066 de jure kingdoms and you're essentially done.

 

[Stoycho]

much better map,and a note,Dobruja(dobrogea) and Karvuna,should be greek or vlach.There was never a bulgarian majority there,altough some bulgarian ultranationalists say there were.Anyway good job

should be slavic.Bulgaria was founded in Dobruja in 681 AD by Khan Asparuch (also Asparuh, Isperih or Ispor). since then most of the time those lands were with slavic majority.
quick quote

Recent scholarship has questioned whether it was Asparuh that established Pliska as the capital, suggesting that the original capital of Bulgaria was in the vicinity of Varna/Balchik (Karvuna)

The principality's name is derived from the fortress of Karvuna (present Balchik), mentioned in Bulgarian and Byzantine documents and Italian portolans of the 14th century as its first capital,[citation needed] and located between Varna and Cape Kaliakra.

 

[unmerged(606777)]

 

[DanubianCossak]

Just a question, are you sure that Albania was Bulgarian culture (i dont know myself)?

 

[vyshan]

Another question, did the slavic tribes ever build temples? I am not sure if they did or did not. If not, how do you suspect paradox would repersent it?

 

[unmerged(606777)]

@DanubianCossack

No idea, actually. Some maps show Bulgaria owned those lands back then.

But you should know better

 

[Hazzy]

Another question, did the slavic tribes ever build temples? I am not sure if they did or did not. If not, how do you suspect paradox would repersent it?

Some holy grooves, some holy trees, but also temples.
One of the most famous that comes to my mind would be the one in Arkona
How to represent them? Not sure could be just a holding with levies and religious ruler, as it probably will. But if Paradox is coming up with something special for Norse temples then they could be pretty much similar.

 

[unmerged(606777)]

Another question, did the slavic tribes ever build temples? I am not sure if they did or did not. If not, how do you suspect paradox would repersent it?

They did. Those were mostly of wood though, so only the foundations are excavated basically. There are descriptions by early Christian missionaries of big and rich stone temples in the Polabian cities of Radogost, Arkona, Retra and some other, though. In Russia remnants were found in Yaroslavl, Kiev, Moscow, Ladoga, Novgorod. But, I imagine, that mostly those were shrines:

 

[DanubianCossak]

@DanubianCossack

No idea, actually. Some maps show Bulgaria owned those lands back then.

But you should know better

Thats the problem with most maps, they tend to show empires at their peak.

For example, i could show you the maximum extent of Serbian Empire, but that doesnt mean that everything was settled by Serbs (cuz it wasnt), the country just blobbed ate lots of neighboring land, and then fell apart.

I honestly dont know, maybe one of the Bulgarian forumites can tell us if Bulgarians lived in northern Albania.

 

[duhsveti]

Seems ok, except Istria. It was never held by Croatians but it was inhabited by Croat population.

 

[Stoycho]

Thats the problem with most maps, they tend to show empires at their peak.

For example, i could show you the maximum extent of Serbian Empire, but that doesnt mean that everything was settled by Serbs (cuz it wasnt), the country just blobbed ate lots of neighboring land, and then fell apart.

I honestly dont know, maybe one of the Bulgarian forumites can tell us if Bulgarians lived in northern Albania.

Bulgaria own the land for some time , but for northern Albania i think - none bulgarian culture is more correctly , as for their neighbors (macedonia) they still speak bulgarian there.

 

[unmerged(606777)]

Still not sure about Aquileia. Of course its main city was the seat of a reknown patriarchate, but the good deal of its territory, as it is in Paradox map layout, was inhabited by Slavs. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gorz

 

[unmerged(619282)]

should be slavic.Bulgaria was founded in Dobruja in 681 AD by Khan Asparuch (also Asparuh, Isperih or Ispor). since then most of the time those lands were with slavic majority.
quick quote

" In 602 during the mutiny of the Byzantine army in the Balkans under Phocas, a large mass of Slavs crossed the Danube, settling south of the Danube. Dobruja remained under loose Byzantine control, and was reorganised during the reign of Constantine IV as Thema Scythia"

so in the south Dobruja,there should be slavic population,while in the north there should be vlachs or greek population

 

[Stoycho]

so in the south Dobruja,there should be slavic population,while in the north there should be vlachs or greek population

on this i agree , hope they made the difference - south/north

 

[unmerged(606777)]

It would be awesome of upon uniting all Slavic tribes as pagan you'd be able to claim the title "The King of Slavia"

 

[Hibernian]

I was thinking that since the Norse are going to be made one culture in the 867 scenario, it might make more sense to have the Slavic tribes as three large cultures and then just have the different tribes be represented as realms (Counties, Duchies and Kingdoms). And then have later splitting of the cultures into the modern ones (Polish, Czech, Croat, Russian, etc).

So I think the world of 867 would look like this:

(Link to full sized image)


The Turkic people in Hungary are the Avars and I've also inserted the Albanians where I think they should be (at least that's the area of modern Albania).

Also here's a nice map of Europe at the time (well 870):

That map is from this University sire: http://sitemaker.umich.edu/mladjov/maps&, where they also have lots of other very good maps. It seems accurate, expect it doesn't show the Principality of Lower Pannonia being separate from Pannonian Croatia.

 

[unmerged(606777)]

@ Hibernian

Cool as always.

Some remarks, though.

Belo Ozero and Rostov might be Finnic with Slavic castles (will it be possible to have different culture for different holdings?)

Moscow and Mojaisk should definately be entirely Slavic. Balto-Slavic hydronyms are absolutely dominant in the area, plus there's a solid archeologic presence of pagan Viatichi kurgans all around Moscow, while we have zero information of any previous settlements there.

Ungvar principality' lands is where historical region of White Croatia, from where, supposedly, Serbs and Croats migrated to Balkans. It's a heavily mountainious region, hence the nomads, be it Avars or Madyars never really settled there. To this day the population of it, apart from the obviously Slavic Carpathian Rusins, is the linguistically Magyarised Slovaks and other Slavs or Vlahs.

Whichever European nomads it was, be it Huns, Avars or Madyars, thier principal area of residence should be Pannonian steppe (that orange thingy):

This is where they dwelt and from where they raided sedentary areas. On our maps it's where the Blatnograd Principality (or Kocel's Principality) is located, and at the start date. Avars, though, were basically wiped out by Franks, Bulgarians and Moravians by that time.
They certainly don't belong to mountainious areas, like "Abauj".

 

[Hibernian]

Moscow and Mojaisk should definately be entirely Slavic. Balto-Slavic hydronyms are absolutely dominant in the area, plus there's a solid archeologic presence of pagan Viatichi kurgans all around Moscow, while we have zero information of any previous settlements there.

You may be right, I was going off of what onodera said (here) about that area not being Slavicized yet. I mean Moscow itself wasn't founded until around 1100 and the area is apparently named after a Finnic tribe (see History of Moscow where it says Slavic tribes only moved into the area in the "9th to 10th centuries", so in 867 is could be either Slavic or Finnic).

Ungvar principality' lands is where historical region of White Croatia, from where, supposedly, Serbs and Croats migrated to Balkans. It's a heavily mountainious region, hence the nomads, be it Avars or Madyars never really settled there. To this day the population of it, apart from the obviously Slavic Carpathian Rusins, is the linguistically Magyarised Slovaks and other Slavs or Vlahs.

I'm not sure which area you're talking about though. Do you mean the area of modern-day Zakarpattia Oblast of Ukraine? If so, I think that area is represented on the CK2 map as the county of Bereg, which I already have as Slavic.

Whichever European nomads it was, be it Huns, Avars or Madyars, thier principal area of residence should be Pannonian steppe (that orange thingy):

Yeah that's approximately where I've put them, though I don't know whether there was Slavs living there too.

This is where they dwelt and from where they raided sedentary areas. On our maps it's where the Blatnograd Principality (or Kocel's Principality) is located, and at the start date. Avars, though, were basically wiped out by Franks, Bulgarians and Moravians by that time.
They certainly don't belong to mountainious areas, like "Abauj".

Well they weren't wiped out, their Khanate was defeated but they were definately still the majority of the population in parts of Hungary, since they were still there when the Magyars came (and probably assimilated them). Probably it was mostly Slavic on the West side of the Danube and mostly Avar on the East side. You could probably move the cultures around a bit to make it more realistic.

As for the Abauj county in the game, I think that area represents Northern Hungary (the modern country's borders), which is flat, not mountainous. Look, here's the map that I worked out for where modern countries are located on the CK2 map:

(Link to full sized image)


The shapes of countries are totally weird, but it's based on the names of the provinces and holding so should be accurate, this is just the way the Dev drew the map.

 

[Ols]

Wow, Moldova and Belarus look painfully mis-shapen.

 

[Son1x]

Wow, Moldova and Belarus look painfully mis-shapen.

At least its not as bad as Slovenia. More than half of its land is mainly in other provinces, mostly Friuli, Istria and Carinthia. Bosnia and Serbia both look pretty awkward.