[Submod] Better Slavs v8.3 (12.07)

[TheDovahkiin97]

@ShinsukeNakamura here is part 2. i missed some things:

"True, but the tribe's name was Polanie, Poljani is a Croatian version."
Im afraid its proto slavic. "poľe" is the exact same pronounciation like "polje". we just write it like this.
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Reconstructionroto-Slavic/poľe

"First part is true, but there were no Proto-Slavs at the end of 10th century, and Veneti were long gone by that time."
And i never said something different? I explained slavic origins there. Not polish history which starts in the 1000s lol

"I didn't know that Polish has additional Baltic features. Also, Old Polish was a emerging language back then, so it couldn't be "created"."
Well it has. And fine say emerged. Doesnt change the fact that the north influenced the south and not the other way around.

"It's true that Bohemia owned Silesia and Lesser Poland at the time, but Sorbs never controlled Lebus, and the link you provided confims that."
Poland had to conquer it and this happend at the same time sorbs got attacked by saxons. The same thing happend to the czechs who lost silesia and southern poland. A Polish-german alliance against them. Also stuff like this:
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/9f/BOGUSŁAWSKI(1861)_Das_Siedlungsgebiet_der_Sorben_vom_7._bis_11._Jahrhundert_in_Mitteldeutschland.jpg

"True for Bohemia, but by the reign of Mieszko I, sorbian tribes where counquered and incorporated into Saxon March."
How does that make any difference?

"First of all "Polanie", not "Poljani"."
No its Poľani(e). The meaning does not change. What are you arguing against?

"There are parts of Czech history, but I'm not an expert in this topic, so I won't discuss it."
Well i am. Not only czech but all slavic history. This is why its pointless to argue against someone who only knows the history of his very own special homeland. You are not able to put historic events into a bigger context of surrounding events. Your inner timeline of events starts in the 1000s and is centered around modern poland while slavic history started long before the 500s.

"To summarize, I think that it comes to White Croats as a single ethnicity insted of separate west, east and south tribes and and insertion of a de jure kingdom between Poland and Russia with remade croatian CoA is ahistorical, because it mixes separate historical facts with fiction. It would be fine in a standalone submod, but it's not a good choice to be inclided in historical one."

Denying the existence of H(a/o)rvatians in for example bohemia is not even worth a discussion. you are so biased about this entire croatia thing that you straight up ignore everything connected to it. Also this ethnicity talk is some next level idiocy i am not willing to continue. I am not croatias chancellor on my mission to fabricate a claim on southern poland.
Great Horvatijas "de jure" territory had to get some CoA so i gave them a slightly different checkerboard. Those are very common in czech, sliesian and polish heraldry. Or does croatia have some sort of claim over all of them?
Do you really think that 1199 Galicia is a better fitting de jure kingdom in 867? If yes idk what to say.

So you obviously dont like the setup. Draw me some cultural map how you think it looked like in 867 and explain why. My popcorn is ready.

 

[ShinsukeNakamura]

no its not. Modern croatia is in dialects: Hrvatska, Horvatska, Harvatska, Ervatska and 'Rvatska. In rare cases even with C instead of TS

My honest mistake.

There is no stron evidence to prove anything at all in this area for the next few hundred years. So calling it fiction because it cant be undeniable proven is extremly pathetic when you push your views the same way.

First of all, adress the whole sentence that I written, not just the second part:
"There's a theory, that intermixture of Proto-Baltic language and Scytian language gave birth to Proto-Slavic language and to Proto-Slavs in general, but there is no strong evidence to prove it."
And I'm not the one pushing my views, you are the one doing it. Maybe "fiction" was too harsh, so the correct term would be "historical theory based on scarse external sources, that has not been undeniably proven and it's not unanimously accepted". This meas while some parts are proven as historical (like Croats is Bohemia), the entire hypothesis has not been universally accepted.

This is literally what it was called in sources like DAI. You are comparing memes to primary sources and idk what to say about that

Once again, please quote entire sentence and not cherrypick a phrase:
"saing that the last name of Proto-Slavic entity was called Megali Croatia/Horvatija is big overstretch"
For White Croatians in De Administratio Imperii, read this. It's a academic attempt to place White Croatians on the map of Europe in mid-10th century (sorry, it's Polish but you can use google translate). It's a really big topic to explain, so maybe I'll write that in another post.

lmao who is the ancestor of modern serbs then? Balkan potatoes? they just spawned there? You know that your siblings have the same ancestors like you do right? There is no way to claim an ancestor for yourself. wtf is this topic

I'm talking about Lusatian Sorbs. Just because Balkan Serbs claim their descent from White Serbia, doesn't mean that in late 9th century and later people living there were Balkan Serbs, and not aforementioned Sorbs, which have their own culture and even two languages of their own!
You told me before:

@ShinsukeNakamura i want sorbs to be proto-slavic just like Horvats because both fade out of the cultural picture very early. Also beacuse both are imho the true proto-slavic cultures.

You want to have 7th Serbs/Sorbs for the entirety of HIP timeframe, like the were frozen in the ice for over 700 hundred years. They cannot stay in the Proto-Slavic-like for whole time, just because 200-300 years before they were predecesors of modern Balkan Serbs. Tribes living there in 867 predecesors of modern Polabian Sorbs and that tribes should be treated as such. It's actually matter of adding Sorbian localisation, Sorbian names, and voila, we get a new culture that improves slavic immesion instead of Wendish blob, which is a old German perspective held upon western Slavs.

But some are and others are not because the people are butthurt about some stuff inside of it so they pick cherrys they like. And thats where we have an issue.

First of all, it's not cherrypicking but source criticism. It's absolutely essential for any historian to master, because it most basic abitily they should have (of course excluding reading and writing). By using source criticism historians examine which informations provided by sources are authentic, it's genesis, meaning and so on. It's valid arguament when it comes to medieval chronicles. In 13th century Polish author Wincenty Kadłubek wrote a Chronica Polonorum and in it's first part wrote about Lechites (supposed ancestors of Poles) waging and wining wars against Alexander the Great and Julius Cesar. Some self-proclaimed historians (https://merlin.pl/a/janusz-bieszk/#read-more, or this YT "historian") treated histories included there as a historical truth (they even made a video with English captions) and this nonsense cameout from the underground into mainstream so much, that historians had to write to counter this trend. It's important to note, because you seem to believe sources on White Croatians without critical aproach.

you completely missed the point of this mod. Did i make them south slavic croatian? or did i make them north slavic Horvatian? Croatian =/= Horvatian. get that in your head. im not trying to find a CB to conquer our land. lmao GIB BACC CROLAND

Once again I'll use this quote:

@ShinsukeNakamura i want sorbs to be proto-slavic just like Horvats because both fade out of the cultural picture very early. Also beacuse both are imho the true proto-slavic cultures.

And yet despite claimed Proto-Slavic-ness, in your mod, Horvatians have: 1. Croatian-based CoA, 2. Croatian localisation, 3. Croatian-like (or south Slavic-like) given names, 4. Croatian-like (or south Slavic-like) last names, 5. Croatian landed titles (or south Slavic-like), 6. Croatian council position names (or south Slavic-like). Do see now why I consider them to be watered-down Balkan Croatians?

and yet he is mentioned in an historic document. Its not about this one person its about the fact that there was talked (like in many other places) about Horvatians

Gesta Hungarorum has the same problem I described above, which is mixing actual history, old legends and straight up fiction. This is why source criticism is so important.

Hurr Durr Croatia is everywhere gib bacc. Invasion now reee

Oof, didn expect meme response in this one ¯\_( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)_/¯ Or is it kind of meltdown, dude? ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

yeah right and it doesnt matter how they call themselves. I actually talked to some online and they were very open about it and showed me some school material they use. very interesting stuff. But there is no evidence so dont let them be what they are i guess.

Anecdotal evidence is evidence from anecdotes: evidence collected in a casual or informal manner and relying heavily or entirely on personal testimony. I would like to see those books, so I can read it for myself.

you can learn a little about linguistics yourself. Example: "Eastern (Slovak) dialects are considerably different from Central and Western dialects in their phonology, morphology and vocabulary, set apart by a stronger connection to Polish and Rusyn"

I even found the Wiki article you quote, but source provided there had expired and I can't read it
I found this text right here and it only had reinforced what had knew before. Eastern Slovak dialects being different from rest of Slovakian is caused by many centuries of peaceful coexistence of Slovaks, Poles and Rysyns, not suspected Horvatski (White Croatian) substratum.

"True, but the tribe's name was Polanie, Poljani is a Croatian version."
Im afraid its proto slavic. "poľe" is the exact same pronounciation like "polje". we just write it like this.
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Reconstructionroto-Slavic/poľe
"First of all "Polanie", not "Poljani"."
No its Poľani(e). The meaning does not change. What are you arguing against?

Honestly, it's just spelling. "Poljani" is a Croatian version of "Polanie". With this logic, I could write "Chorwaci", "Serbowie", "Biała Chorwacja" and so on. Let's be historically (and linguistically) accurate.

"First part is true, but there were no Proto-Slavs at the end of 10th century, and Veneti were long gone by that time."
And i never said something different? I explained slavic origins there. Not polish history which starts in the 1000s lol

I hate "you forgot Poland" rhetoric, but Poland was baptised in 966 therefore it couldn't start in the 1000s
But medieval Polish state has been growing for a few decades before the baptism. And tell me, how's Polish history different from Slavic origins?

"I didn't know that Polish has additional Baltic features. Also, Old Polish was a emerging language back then, so it couldn't be "created"."
Well it has. And fine say emerged.

Please, tell me which features in Polish come from Baltic and if, how much it makes Polish standout among other Slavic languages. Or are there any features that come from Baltic, that other slavic languages (i.e. Russian or Croatian) don't have? I'm asking, because my "Historical grammar of Polish language" doesn't mention it and as an academic book it's a reliable source of information.

Spoiler

Also, if any slavic language was influenced by (or had some features) Baltic, it's probably Belorussian or even Old Russian.

Doesnt change the fact that the north influenced the south and not the other way around.

Slavs being result of intermixing between Balts and Scythians it's still a theory. More widely acceppted theory is that Slavs originated from the area that is now a Belarusian-Ukrainian border. If you look up the map above, you'll see that southernmost border ends around modern Kiev and aforementioned border. Scythians were the pontic steppe people and at he time area of Slavic homeland was covered with dense forests. But of course there were contacts between them, and here you can read about Iranian borrowings in Slavic (under "Zapożyczenia irańskie"), Balto-Slavic only specific vocabulary, Balto-Slavic-Iranian and Slavic-Iranian. So it would seem it's "the other way around" as you said.

"It's true that Bohemia owned Silesia and Lesser Poland at the time, but Sorbs never controlled Lebus, and the link you provided confims that."
Poland had to conquer it and this happend at the same time sorbs got attacked by saxons. The same thing happend to the czechs who lost silesia and southern poland. A Polish-german alliance against them. Also stuff like this:
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/9f/BOGUSŁAWSKI(1861)_Das_Siedlungsgebiet_der_Sorben_vom_7._bis_11._Jahrhundert_in_Mitteldeutschland.jpg

My bad, I had mistaken Kostrzyn for Lubusz. But it's doesn't change anything within your setup, because in the map above Sorbs had counquered western bank of Odra where Lubusz is (red dot), while Kostrzyn (yellow circle) lays on opposite side of the river:

"There are parts of Czech history, but I'm not an expert in this topic, so I won't discuss it."
Well i am. Not only czech but all slavic history.

Well, then lecture me about Pomeranians and Polabians, I'll wait.

This is why its pointless to argue against someone who only knows the history of his very own special homeland. You are not able to put historic events into a bigger context of surrounding events. Your inner timeline of events starts in the 1000s and is centered around modern poland while slavic history started long before the 500s.

Or maybe I know Polish history because I'm Polish and I'm interested in medieval history of my country? Isn't it the thing you are doing? It's like you read this one and only book and you got so overwhelmed with it, that you are on a complete confirmation bias, not me? Great part about "bigger context" and "inner timeline". Why do you think that my timeline starts in 11th century? Is it just because I have my votum separatum and I'm asking questions?
I'm not questionig Slavic history as a whole, but 500s where long gone before year 867 (300 years!). You criticise setup of historical setup of Galicia-Volynia form 1199 being put in 867, but you have no problem with putting vague Old Croatia from at most year 562 and fast forwarding it to almost 300 years later.

"To summarize, I think that it comes to White Croats as a single ethnicity insted of separate west, east and south tribes and and insertion of a de jure kingdom between Poland and Russia with remade croatian CoA is ahistorical, because it mixes separate historical facts with fiction. It would be fine in a standalone submod, but it's not a good choice to be inclided in historical one."

Denying the existence of H(a/o)rvatians in for example bohemia is not even worth a discussion. you are so biased about this entire croatia thing that you straight up ignore everything connected to it. Also this ethnicity talk is some next level idiocy i am not willing to continue. I am not croatias chancellor on my mission to fabricate a claim on southern poland.

I never said that I deny exictence of White Croats in Bohemia, Southern Russia or anywhere else. The thing I'm opposed to is drawing a big kingdom, that even if existed in the past, doesn't belong in 867 setup, and it's rather expression of your wishful thinking and "whataboutism" (which BTW accused me of in the past), coined into this game. I'm opposed to making all this H(a/o)rvatians into one big culture blob - second largest slavic culture in the game. As you said in another topic:

The "kingdom" is not white croatia its the earlier Horvatija Megali/Great "Croatia". Its just a de jure leftover as its the best contigous title for 867 in that place.
The culture is indeed a stretch in this extend but i think "Polish" and "Russian" are far bigger stretches.

It means that you agree that this big blob is a strech. I see the problem with Russian culture, but users are working on this issue. But really don't see why Polish culture is bigger strech than unattested in linguistic sources Horvatian culture.

Great Horvatijas "de jure" territory had to get some CoA so i gave them a slightly different checkerboard. Those are very common in czech, sliesian and polish heraldry. Or does croatia have some sort of claim over all of them?

The chequy CoA was popular in all of Europe back then, but not earlier than 11th century. I saw that you put Kolovrat on checkerboard which historically plausible, but the latter doesn't really belong in 867 setting.

Do you really think that 1199 Galicia is a better fitting de jure kingdom in 867? If yes idk what to say.

Yes, I do, because IMO it's more historical than suspected and historically unproven kingdom from mid 6th century. Or there should be de jure kingdom of Old Saxony, which ceased to exist less than 100 before 867 setup? Or Kindom of Frisia that fell to the Franks in 734, and it is far more histotically attested than White Croatia.

So you obviously dont like the setup. Draw me some cultural map how you think it looked like in 867 and explain why. My popcorn is ready.

Yes, I do not like the setup. I'll write another post, because this one is already very long.

I agree that my already long introduction isnt long enough and that i need to collect more sources. One day i will. However you can start with this.

Please be patient, so I could learn Russian language and Cyrillic script and only then I will be able to read this book. Sadly, I can't even paste the content of this book into google translate, because it's a scan (ノಠ益ಠ)ノ彡┻━┻
Holy s.. that's a really long post that took me a entire day to write. I have a one request - please adress everything i have written here and don't quote separate phrases, but whole sentences.

 

[TheDovahkiin97]

This meas while some parts are proven as historical (like Croats is Bohemia), the entire hypothesis has not been universally accepted.

im here to change that with logic and facts.

For White Croatians in De Administratio Imperii, read this.

"While the claim that the Croats lived in Malopolska or on the Dnester is found to be based on most implausible evidence, the references to their stay in Bohemia or Russia do carry some weight."
Bruh wtf is this dude saying. The cracovians literally identified as croatians lmao. you can read the original documents even linked on wiki. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Croats#Modern_era
"This prompts the suggestion that the high respect that the Croat ethnonym enjoyed in Bohemia and Moravia may have reflected a period of domination of tribes believed to be Croat while the use of ethnic or geographical toponymy with Croatian associations may have been connected with myths of South Croatian descent."
yeah our famous myths about our origin and existence spread everywhere. Also in primary sources. How is this dude reasonable for you? "Yeah Bohemia, Russia maybe Silesia but southern poland? NEVER. IMPOSSIBLE. MYTHS! TREASON! HERESY!" hell outta here

Just because Balkan Serbs claim their descent from White Serbia, doesn't mean that in late 9th century and later people living there were Balkan Serbs

I never said that? Balkan Serbs came from Sorbia and not the other way around lol

You want to have 7th Serbs/Sorbs for the entirety of HIP timeframe, like the were frozen in the ice for over 700 hundred years. They cannot stay in the Proto-Slavic-like for whole time, just because 200-300 years before they were predecesors of modern Balkan Serbs.

Yes but they are an independent power in 867. Not that much later only one province is left with their culture. I doubt you will see some sorb if you start there. Also 867, 936 and 955 are the core dates for my mod in this order. Id actually like to have 889 as a perfect start date but thats another story.

It's important to note, because you seem to believe sources on White Croatians without critical aproach.

I dont. But if you criticize you should explain why and stop this "no u" bs

And yet despite claimed Proto-Slavic-ness, in your mod, Horvatians have: 1. Croatian-based CoA, 2. Croatian localisation, 3. Croatian-like (or south Slavic-like) given names, 4. Croatian-like (or south Slavic-like) last names, 5. Croatian landed titles (or south Slavic-like), 6. Croatian council position names (or south Slavic-like). Do see now why I consider them to be watered-down Balkan Croatians?

I admit thats an issue i will have to fix. Not so much about ortography but to eradicate everything only seen in south slavic languages. Also the CoA is just fine but feel free to make better suggestions. There are plenty of red/white checkerboards all over the salvic world (just like horvatian heritage) maybe even the polish flag is a zoomed in version (joke [or is it? ^^])

Oof, didn expect meme response in this one ¯\_( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)_/¯ Or is it kind of meltdown, dude? ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

no im making fun of you and your poland-protecting

Anecdotal evidence is evidence from anecdotes: evidence collected in a casual or informal manner and relying heavily or entirely on personal testimony. I would like to see those books, so I can read it for myself.

obviously i dont have western ukrainian history school books. Selfidentifications aint anecdotes.

I found this text right here and it only had reinforced what had knew before. Eastern Slovak dialects being different from rest of Slovakian is caused by many centuries of peaceful coexistence of Slovaks, Poles and Rysyns, not suspected Horvatski (White Croatian) substratum.

yeah you can always say stuff like that but im saying differently. Evidence? im sry i dont have any books from 800AD eastern europe.

Honestly, it's just spelling. "Poljani" is a Croatian version of "Polanie". With this logic, I could write "Chorwaci", "Serbowie", "Biała Chorwacja" and so on. Let's be historically (and linguistically) accurate.

What are you arguing against? This is not the point. The point is the meaning of the word god dammit. Absolutely irrelevant how you write it.

And tell me, how's Polish history different from Slavic origins?

Slavic history didnt start with polish history?

Please, tell me which features in Polish come from Baltic and if, how much it makes Polish standout among other Slavic languages.

I would like to but this topic is far to big and i sadly have no time for collecting sources

So it would seem it's "the other way around" as you said.

This was not about balts/skythians but about people from modern polish north and modern polish south.

My bad, I had mistaken Kostrzyn for Lubusz. But it's doesn't change anything within your setup, because in the map above Sorbs had counquered western bank of Odra where Lubusz is (red dot), while Kostrzyn (yellow circle) lays on opposite side of the river:

map fixing is far to much and i dont like to do much there. The Lubuszanie tribe rules this province and thats the importance here. Also they are inside the sorb union in base HIP so im the wrong to blame.

Well, then lecture me about Pomeranians and Polabians, I'll wait.

ask anything.

You criticise setup of historical setup of Galicia-Volynia form 1199 being put in 867, but you have no problem with putting vague Old Croatia from at most year 562 and fast forwarding it to almost 300 years later.

I am waiting for better ideas. also about the cultural setup.

But really don't see why Polish culture is bigger strech than unattested in linguistic sources Horvatian culture.

because as i said poland is the result of one farmer tibe taking over forcefully with outside help (Germany/HRE). Doesnt make them all farmers does it? Im still waiting for a better setup.

The chequy CoA was popular in all of Europe back then, but not earlier than 11th century.

ah you were present or read some books or paintings from back then? no? so htf you know? GIB IDEAS. STOP "I DONT LIKE THIS"

Yes, I do, because IMO it's more historical than suspected and historically unproven kingdom from mid 6th century. Or there should be de jure kingdom of Old Saxony, which ceased to exist less than 100 before 867 setup? Or Kindom of Frisia that fell to the Franks in 734, and it is far more histotically attested than White Croatia.

thats where we simply disagree.

 

[ShinsukeNakamura]

im here to change that with logic and facts.

Great, cause up to that point I saw truths mixed with halftruths and theories.

"While the claim that the Croats lived in Malopolska or on the Dnester is found to be based on most implausible evidence, the references to their stay in Bohemia or Russia do carry some weight."
Bruh wtf is this dude saying. The cracovians literally identified as croatians lmao. you can read the original documents even linked on wiki. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Croats#Modern_era

You can also read this https://quod.lib.umich.edu/m/moa/afl0168.0001.001?type=simple&rgn=full+text&q1=Bielochrovats&submit=Search. It clearly says that:

So White Croats are not separate ethnic group, but just a subdivision of Poles. There is no mention of 100,000 Bielo-Chorvats on those pages. And I haven't noticed such claim in the rest of report.
And even if people identified as Belocrovats as a separate entity in those documents, then tell me why nobody's identifed as such in population census in Austro-Hungary?

Spoiler: really big map here

So at most Crovats were a subdivision of Poles, just like Kujawianie and Mazowszanie, not separate entity, so saying things like "The cracovians literally identified as croatians lmao" is a reeeeally big overstrech without this bigger picture that you like to say.
I was reluctant to post the following, beacuse it does not reference any document, but it's still worth mentioning, as the part of aforementioned bigger picture:

Spoiler: About White Croatia and Lesser Poland

Very good, Dragomir, that you started a new thread, because the "White Croatia" problem deserves it.
The name "Krakow" can indeed resemble many toponyms appearing in Dalmatia and beyond. If we assume that the original name was Krk (s), with syllabic r, then today it should sound like "Karków" (because in Polish this syllabic r has changed into "ar"). There is only a small "but". Syllabic R still occurs today not only in Serbo-Croatian, but also in Czech (which has also preserved a true monument - one that is soporific, even in Sanskrit already in decline). So this "ar" - "ra" change can also be Czech influence.
As for White Croatia - its existence is confirmed by Nestor, Porphyrogenet and Arab sources. Łowmiański even suggested that there were three White Croatia - Ukrainian, Polish and Czech (the latter "maybe"). The former would live on the upper Dniester, as well as "certainly" behind the Carpathians. Thus, "multiplying" the northern Croats, Łowmianski came to the conclusion that the division into whites and reds took place before settling in the Balkans and those red (Polish?) Connected with the Cherven Cities. While Biała (or using the Łowmian terminology - "Northern") Croatia for various historical reasons (about which later) gained a second (or maybe even a third) virtual life, then the Cherven Cities conceals another puzzle - a completely forgotten Duleb tribe. These Dulebos are found near all supposed Croatian backwoods: first in Volhynia, where they are identified with the Volhynians (and I would like to remind you that the Volyn stronghold was located within the Cherven Cities), they also lived in the Czech Basin, as well as in ... Croatia, the right one, where they merged with the Croats. Maybe somebody will ask for these Dulebos and we will soon read about "Great Dulebia"?
Seriously - the weakness of Łowmianski's concept is eraseing Lędzians from the then map of Europe. They simply lack space for them. And I remind you - they are mentioned by Porphyrogenet, Nestor (Lachy), and earlier a Bavarian Geographer, who, however, did not notice the White Croats at all (hence the presumption that they are hidden under the name Vistulan). In another thread I am pulling the case of these Lędzians - a "lost" Polish tribe - so here I can only mention that Lędzian with White Croats, in my opinion, can not be identified. Here in 981 Włodzimierz (Vladimir the Great) beat Lachs and took Gherven Cities. And in 992 he went to the Croats. So White Croatia survived the Lach - Lędzian state. The end of the 10th century is really very late. I would like to remind you that the "Lachs" displaced shortly afterwards from Chełmszczyzna - Wołyń to the Ros' river (Zadnieprze - left-bank Ukraine in English) kept their separateness (Polishness) for a long time. So Lędzians are definitely not Croats. So where did Włodzimierz go in 992? There are two possibilities - on Halich (Paszkiewicz directly identifies White Croatia with Halicz), or - Lesser Poland (Kraków).
I exclude the first option (why - later), while the second option would assume the existence of this enigmatic "Czech" White Croatia, which would reach for Kraków in 981 on the occasion of the trial between Włodzimierz and Lędzians. I met with the presumption that the capital of this "Czech" White Croatia was Libice, and the rulers - Slavnikovich. The slaughter of these and the destruction of Libice in 995 explains that we don't hear about White Croatia anymore.
I mean we hear, but different. Because here for the first time in historiography Halich connected with Croats no one else but Kadłubek in his chronicle. Directly calls Russians there as Croats. It is interesting that Kadłubek in this case practiced something of a "historical policy" - he was involved in justifying the rights of Hungarian Andrzej II (the ruler of Croatia proper) to Halicz (I would like to remind you that the name "Principality of Galicia and Lodomeria" comes from Andrzej [Andrew II of Hungary]). So I assume that this "Rusyn" variant of White Croatia comes from the very popular Kadłubek Chronicle, and the possible source on which it was based was Nestor.
For the second time, White Croatia "revived" at the end of the 18th century, in connection with the plans of the first partition of Poland, initiated by Austria. Viennese scientists prepared the justification for this partition. While in the case of "Galicia" the justification of the annexation were 13-14 century grievances of Hungarian kings, in Lesser Poland Viennese scientists saw White Croatia, which was a fief of the Czech . Austria - as the successor of these two monarchies - did not annex this part of Poland, it returned to the lands that it had long owned, and was previously seized by Poland. Oddly enough - and to me rather scary - questioning the very existence of Polishness by the Austrian partitioner proved extremely effective. The dark Polish peasant, as a rule "local", was entered in the records of the "Białochorwat" office and instructed in "Croatianness". And let's remember that the rabacja comes from "Chrobacja". [it's a joke, in case you didn't notice it].
On the Croatian pages you can find arguments for "Croatian" of Lesser Poland. Here, hundreds of thousands of immigrants from Galicia were to come to the United States to declare White Croatian nationality. They "declared" what the Austrian official wrote in the record. These "hundreds of thousands" prove the scale of this practice: in Lesser Poland they almost managed to "create" a new nation for 100 years. Thus, not only our Pope's mother had white-Croatian nationality in her records. And to add piquancy: on this basis, our eastern neighbors maintain that she was Ukrainian! This hulled White Croatia - in Halicz - found many followers in Western Ukraine. But can they be surprised, since the Polish historian - Paszkiewicz - nowadays recognizes Kadłubek's authority?
So - "historical policy" eternally alive.

"This prompts the suggestion that the high respect that the Croat ethnonym enjoyed in Bohemia and Moravia may have reflected a period of domination of tribes believed to be Croat while the use of ethnic or geographical toponymy with Croatian associations may have been connected with myths of South Croatian descent."
yeah our famous myths about our origin and existence spread everywhere. Also in primary sources. How is this dude reasonable for you? "Yeah Bohemia, Russia maybe Silesia but southern poland? NEVER. IMPOSSIBLE. MYTHS! TREASON! HERESY!" hell outta here

First of all, don't cherrypick and read the entire essay very carefully. For exapmple "Silesia" referes to the area near Kladsko, not the entirety of Silesia, which for some season is Sorbian-Horvatian.
I wrote it before, legends should not be treated as literal, legit information about specific past events. If that was the case, then Lech, Czech and Rus brothers should be considered historical, unlike it perceived now as the origin myth and awareness of common ancestry among Slavs. Side note, if the legend is treated literally, it means that Balkan Slavs are not Slavs, because they were not mentioned in it. Do you see now, why source criticism is essential when it comes to historical research, and old legends should not be treated as legit source information about past events just because they are old? It's the same issue with written documents, just because they are old doesn't mean they are correct. I'm copy pasting an exerpt from essay mentioned before:

Spoiler: About White Croatia and Czechia

Similar interpretation problems, like the Anonymous account, are the work of the emperor Constantine VII Porphyrogenet De administrando imperio (hereinafter DAI). It was probably founded in the years 949-952, based on the previous inquiries of the author and a group of his collaborators. Writing about White / Great Croatia, the learned ruler spoke about the Czech state in it (Testimonia 2,321; DAI 30, 73-75; Testimonia 3, 431, 436: DAI 31, 3-5; 85-87; Łowmianski 1963, 169). Sometimes the puzzling testimony of Porphyrogenetus was taken to the agenda, assuming that he simply transferred the entire name of a small tribe of Czech Croats to the whole country (See, vice versa, 1947, 18). In this case, the matter is not easy at all, since it is not clear why the whole princes should be given the name just inconspicuous Croats, and not, for example, Deczanie or Litomierzyce? He also wonders about the transfer of the term "Croatia" from Moravia to the Czech Republic, despite the lack of their direct territorial and political succession (P a-nic 1995, 107). Moreover, the emperor Constantine did not know any other name of the principality of Przemysłowiców than Croatia (cf. Labuda 1949 , 215, note 8.) Although in Chapter 32 DAI the name Boiki (= Bohemia) appears for the Serbian fatherland (Testimonia 3, 436; DAI 32, 4), but the author clearly did not associate this country with the real, X- an eternal Czech state, i.e. ... White Croatia! The slightly repeated claims that Porphyrogenet had quite a vague idea of the Czech Republic are not convincing. was obliged to know about the powerful state of Premyslids (P e? ich 1945, 39-40), located at a strategically important point in Byzantium between Germany and Hungary. It can be inferred from this that the name White / Great Croatia14 was actually used at the time to describe the Czech Republic. More: it can be argued that the southern Croats, presumed informants of Constantine VII (see below), did not entertain the creation of learned combinations, but used the name White Croatia colloquially to describe the modern principality of the north. Speaking of the armed forces of White Croatia (Testimonia 3, 435-436; DAI 31, 85-87), they probably had it as a living political unit. This name, as a Czech term, did not end up in Western sources, because they used long-term terminology in relation to them15. What's more, the western sources of this period are of an extremely political and vintage nature, in contrast to the Arabic and DAI sources, which show quite a lot of history and ethnography. In this case, it is not surprising that the name of Croatia in relation to Moravia and the Czech Republic happened to be in Porphyrogenetus and in Anonymous Relations, and its absence in German years, as terms outside the sphere of current politics. It should be remembered that the DAI message about Croatia may contain a heterogeneous set of data, taken from sources of various provenance (Szafarzyk 1844, 481; Mockski 1920, 20-22; Łowmiański 1963, 163-167). This is the only way to explain such inconsistencies of relevant fragments, such as: mentioning White / Great Croatia next to Boika = Czech, Pecheneg raids on it, or notorious calling on its non-baptized, which requires that the interpretation of the relevant DAI passages also include Silesia (Bakala) 1967, 370-371; Havlik 1964, 79), and maybe even Rus. This, of course, does not change the fact that the framework of the data Porphyrogenets about White Croatia must be referred to the real Czech state. It is more than likely that Constantine VII's informants already had considerable trouble determining who exactly the White Croats were. This could be due to incomplete overlapping of the terms: geographical - Czech Basin, political - Czech state within its current borders and ethnic - White Croatia. The Croats did not live all over the Czech Republic, while also staying in Silesia, where the Czech authorities did not necessarily reach then - such a tangle had to cause ambiguities.

As it had been stated in that paper, it's likely that Porphyrogenetus made a mistake in DAI regarding placement of White Croatia. And the part about myths, you are the one actually butthurt at this guy saying that they were myths

I never said that? Balkan Serbs came from Sorbia and not the other way around lol

But yet, just like Horvatians of the north they have: 1. Serbian localisation, 2. Serbian-like (or south Slavic-like) given names, 3. Serbian-like (or south Slavic-like) last names, 4. Serbian landed titles names (or south Slavic-like), 5. Serbian council position names (or south Slavic-like). Do see now why I consider them to be watered-down Balkan Serbians? Sorbs in your mod even have the same given names as Horvatians. Of course, you'll something like "I don't have time" and so on, but there are living actual Sorbs living there with their own unique names (though heavily germanised), that you can find here for example. What's the problem of using modern Sorbian setup?

Yes but they are an independent power in 867. Not that much later only one province is left with their culture. I doubt you will see some sorb if you start there. Also 867, 936 and 955 are the core dates for my mod in this order. Id actually like to have 889 as a perfect start date but thats another story.

Honestly, I don't see how it's an asnwer to the paragrah I wrote. And I don't see what being independent at the time with culture of living-breathing people, that survived to this day (even though severely weakend during centuries)

I dont. But if you criticize you should explain why and stop this "no u" bs

In last 2-3 comments I explained why I disagree with you.

I admit thats an issue i will have to fix. Not so much about ortography but to eradicate everything only seen in south slavic languages. Also the CoA is just fine but feel free to make better suggestions. There are plenty of red/white checkerboards all over the salvic world (just like horvatian heritage) maybe even the polish flag is a zoomed in version (joke [or is it? ^^])

It is about ortography, because Slavic ortographies generally diferentiate (at least in their alphabets, just like Polish does) between voiceless "ch", that comes from protoslavic, and voiced "h" that comes from borrowings and "g" sound (see Czech, Russian, Upper Sorbian for example). Only Slovenian and abeceda/latinica/gajica use "h" in their alphabets for voiceless velar fricative. So changing, for example, "Lech" into "Leh" and "Lendians/Ljachs" into "Ljahs" is a quite a mistake and as a guy knowledgeable in Slavs, you definitely should know this.

no im making fun of you and your poland-protecting

Is it Poland-protecting or proven-historical-reseach-done-by-hundreds-of-historians-and-being-proven-as-accurate-protecting?

obviously i dont have western ukrainian history school books. Selfidentifications aint anecdotes.

I was refering to this part:

yeah right and it doesnt matter how they call themselves. I actually talked to some online and they were very open about it and showed me some school material they use. very interesting stuff. But there is no evidence so dont let them be what they are i guess.

You know that I could also say sth like "Yeah, I told to this guy and he told me that there are no Croatians, just Catholic Serbs and he showed me some books, but I can't show you because I don't have them". It's really this kind of rhethoric and that's what anecdotical evidence means. I don't think I need to be lectured about selfidentification, because among Kashubians is this big debate wherer we are an ethnic minority within Polish nation or separate nation. So from now on I will treat Rusyns = White Croats as unproved. Also read this (source
Państwo i społeczeństwo 2008/2, p. 120-121):

The Carpathian leaders are derived from the legendary tribe of White Croatian, who lived in the Carpathian Mountains in the 5th century. The myth of the origin of Ruthenians from White Croats is of great importance for the group's integration and legitimization of its contemporary ambitions. Despite the fact that there are several - considered to be more likely - concepts in science regarding the genesis of settlement in the Carpathians, Ruthenian activists are inclined to ignore it and prefer white-Croatian, because it allows to distinguish Ruthenians from Ukrainians and explain the cultural differences perceived by the respondents between the two groups.

yeah you can always say stuff like that but im saying differently. Evidence? im sry i dont have any books from 800AD eastern europe.

Once again, Rusyns =/= White Croats, because you can't prove your theory. This region was subject of linguistic resaerch in the past and nothing suspicious that could be traced back to White Croatians had not been found there.

Slavic history didnt start with polish history?

I honestly can't understand what you try to imply here.

I would like to but this topic is far to big and i sadly have no time for collecting sources

I showed you my book and you got lil' bit scared, don't you? So if you don't have time for collecting sources, then why did you write about this in your introduction in a first place? Because you shouldn't write about something without sources. At this point, I don't know if you read it in some book some time ago, or you simply made that up. While still waiting for the sources, I'll counter what you had written in introduction with my academic book, and until you prove otherwise, I consider "Polish is Slavic language with Baltic influence" as unproven and therefore it shouldn't be the mod, which claims to improve Slavic immersion.

This was not about balts/skythians but about people from modern polish north and modern polish south.

Okay, tell me about northern Polish and southern Polish then. And please tell me what you think about that was written by me about Belorusians.

map fixing is far to much and i dont like to do much there. The Lubuszanie tribe rules this province and thats the importance here. Also they are inside the sorb union in base HIP so im the wrong to blame.

Ok, I see that setup in HIP is the thing that should be changed.

ask anything.

In it's time, I defitely will.

I am waiting for better ideas. also about the cultural setup.

Cultural setup was fine as it was, honestly. Of course we can debate whether one big russian culture should be split into smaller ones, inclusion of Slovaks. One think that I would change in HIP is breaking up Vendi culture into Sorbian, Polabian and Pomeranian/Kashubian and creating respective kingdoms for them. Just because you read something that it's not widely historically approved (not white croatia in general, but big horvatski culture blob), it doesn't mean you should in flip in your mod (which I'll always say that you did great job regarding south slavs) the entire cultural setup in Central Europe! Thats what I'm saying and you seem not to notice it.

because as i said poland is the result of one farmer tibe taking over forcefully with outside help (Germany/HRE). Doesnt make them all farmers does it? Im still waiting for a better setup.

Isn't conquest a thing that other tribe/nations did in the past? Because I'm afraid that soon you will say something like "Poland and Polish language are artificial concepts".

ah you were present or read some books or paintings from back then? no? so htf you know? GIB IDEAS. STOP "I DONT LIKE THIS"

Of course I wasn't, wtf is this question?

thats where we simply disagree.

Yes we do, and I don't see that we will come to any sort of agreement.

 

[TheDovahkiin97]

So White Croats are not separate ethnic group, but just a subdivision of Poles

This is a conclusion from modern times, ofc they are polish already at this point in time. They melted for centuries in the same state. But they were not before. You have to understand that "Polani/Poljani" is a ridiculously generic name for some minor slavic tribe around poznan which translates into "Farmers/Fielders". There were dozens of tribes all over the slavic world with the same name. Like the Poljani around Kiev. If they had the opportunity to dominate their surroundings we would have a second Poland with Kiev as its Capital.

And even if people identified as Belocrovats as a separate entity in those documents, then tell me why nobody's identifed as such in population census in Austro-Hungary?

you cant be for real can you? They put Croats and Serbs into one culture, all the northern othodox/greek catholic slavs into "russian", czechs and slovaks into one etc. is this really your argument?

So at most Crovats were a subdivision of Poles, just like Kujawianie and Mazowszanie, not separate entity

All of those WERE seperate. If Kujavians had the opportunity to dominate we would have a "Kujavia" state today and not Poland.

I was reluctant to post the following, beacuse it does not reference any document, but it's still worth mentioning, as the part of aforementioned bigger picture:

I have never seen so much BS on one page and i couldnt give less fucks about what some ultra polish dude says online.

As it had been stated in that paper, it's likely that Porphyrogenetus made a mistake in DAI regarding placement of White Croatia. And the part about myths, you are the one actually butthurt at this guy saying that they were myths

k.
idk why i keep reading this as i dont even have time to continue my research

What's the problem of using modern Sorbian setup?

Because this is a mod about the past. And yes i admitted this issue and hopefully it will be fixed one day

Yes we do, and I don't see that we will come to any sort of agreement.

True, I will never accept "Polish" in the form of modern Poland as a cultural picture before the one AND ONLY "polish" tribe managed to even form it (with force and outside help).
I will never accept this downplay of the importance the "croat" and "sorb" identities had on the creation of the slavic culture itself.
Also i will never accept that modern slavic nations formed naturally around pre existing "cultures" or "ethnicities" as you like to call them (what in the fuck btw).

The first person to ever openly dislike my mod was a hardcore nationalistic serb who is now completely on board.
The other following two (including you) were some polish dudes.
If you dont like my mod - dont use it. Good day i got RL stuff to do. I might have more time around july or from september and ongoing.

 

[DorlasAnther]

True, I will never accept "Polish" in the form of modern Poland as a cultural picture before the one AND ONLY "polish" tribe managed to even form it (with force and outside help).
I will never accept this downplay of the importance the "croat" and "sorb" identities had on the creation of the slavic culture itself.
Also i will never accept that modern slavic nations formed naturally around pre existing "cultures" or "ethnicities" as you like to call them (what in the fuck btw).

I have never seen so much BS on one page and i couldnt give less fucks about what some ultra polish dude says online.

What this comment shows is that you have a worldview that cannot be changed no matter the counterargument provided and would rather riddicule it than argue against it.

Combined with your severe lack of understanding of modern history of West Slavs (which wouldn´t be an issue if you didn´t use events from 19th and 20th century as proofs for your theories about events happening over a millenia ago), usage of medieval chronicles (sources which, as any historian would tell you, are often not to be trusted and should be read with grain of salt) combined with articles from Wikipedia as your provided sources (articles which often refer to afforementioned chronicles or have no links whatsoever), the fact that you consider yourelf an expert on all early Slavs (a statement that even many historians or archaeologists would be cautious to make), I am lead to believe that you are someone who might know about wide range of topics regarding early Slavs on surface level, but you rarely, if ever dig deeper.

Which is an easy way to end up misinformed, yet believing you are smarter than everyone else. That seems to be the case, given that you are willing to handwave disagreement as coming from butthurt people from other Slavic nations.

If you dont like my mod - dont use it.

This is public forum. By putting your creation on a public forum, you are opening it to feedback and said feedback can be negative just as it can be positive.
To paraphrase what you said: If you don´t like feedback - don´t make your work public.

 

[Pressburger]

Since I did not like the Serbian names used for Sorbs, I made a list from Upper and Lower Sorbian names I found on the internet. It might not be top quality but at least it's not Serbian. Use to your (dis)pleasure

sorbian = {
        graphical_cultures = { westernslavicgfx }
        color = { 0.4 0.6 0.2 }
        male_names = {
            Awgust_August
            Bartiš_Bartholomew Beno_Bernard Bjarnat_Bernard Bjedrich_Frederick Blažij_Blasius Bohacesc Bohachwal
            Bohumer_Bohumir Bohuwer Boscij_Sebastian Bosko_Sebastian Cescimer Chryša_Christopher Domaš Dytar_Dieter
            Dytmar_Dietmar Gensch_John Gerat_Gerard Hadam_Adam Handrej_Andrew Hanoš Hantuš Hanzo_Hans Hawštyn_Augustine
            Hendrich_Henry Horislaw Hrjehor_Gregory Hurban_Urban Jaromer_Jaromir Jona_Jonah Jurij_George Just_Justin
            Miklawš_Nicholas Klaws_Nicholas Klimant_Clement Korla_Charles Krabat Krescan_Christian Kryšan_Christian
            Krystof_Christofer Lawrjenc_Laurence Lukaš_Lucas Lyško Matuš_Matthew Macij_Matthew Mercin_Martin
            Merko_Martin Meroslaw_Miroslav Meto Mjecislaw Mjertin_Martin Mójzas_Moses Moric_Maurice Natuš_Nathan
            Nišan_Nicholas Pawol_Paul Pec_Peter Radomer_Radomir Rajnar_Ragnar Rudij_Rolf Rodzislaw Scepan_Stephen Stanij_Stanislav
            Sylwijo_Silvester Syman_Simon Tomaš_Thomas Waltar_Walter Wito_Vitus Wjaclaw_Vaclav Wjelemer_Velemir Wylem_William
        }
        female_names = {
            Agnisa_Agnes Anet Berbel_Barbara Bernadet Betina Bjanka_Blance Bjedruška_Frederique Borbora_Barbara
            Chrystina_Christina Danuta Dobyslawa_Dobroslava Džiwona Elka Elžbjeta_Elisabeth Ewelin Gerša_Gertrude
            Giza_Gisela Gizela_Gisela Gretka_Grethe Habeta Halena Hana_Anna Handrijka Hanža_Agnes Hapula_Apollonia
            Herma Hila Hilža Hilžbjeta_Elisabeth Ilza Jadza_Hedwig Jagata_Agatha Janet_Joan Jewa_Eva Jewelin
            Juljana_Juliana Juta_Judith Katarina_Catherine Klawdija_Claudia Konstanca_Constance Kristina_Christine
            Lawra_Laura Lejna Lenka Lowiza_Louise Lubina Lydija Madlena_Magdalena Madlenka Majka_Mary Marhata_Margaret
            Marka Marša_Mary Marija_Mary Merana Merka Meroslawa_Miroslava Mjecislawa Orta Otilija Pawla_Paula
            Plonja_Apollonia Rejza_Teresa Tereza_Teresa Relka_Aurelia Reta Rodzislawa Roza_Rosa Rozalka_Rosa
            Silwija_Silvana Sylka Sybila_Sibylla Trudla_Gertrude Werina Wita Wórša_Ursula Woršula_Ursula Wortija_Dorothy
            Zusana_Susana
        }
        from_dynasty_prefix = "z "
        modifier = pommeranian_culture_modifier
        allow_looting = yes
    }

 

[ShinsukeNakamura]

This is a conclusion from modern times, ofc they are polish already at this point in time. They melted for centuries in the same state. But they were not before. You have to understand that "Polani/Poljani" is a ridiculously generic name for some minor slavic tribe around poznan which translates into "Farmers/Fielders". There were dozens of tribes all over the slavic world with the same name. Like the Poljani around Kiev. If they had the opportunity to dominate their surroundings we would have a second Poland with Kiev as its Capital.

So just because they sound generic? Just because it sound like farmers? What in the actual F does this mean? Are you trying to imply that Polans were bunch of simple peasants that with foreign help (oh that pesky Germans!) were able to form their country? And if you read this link, which I specifically had put in my second to last comment:

I hate "you forgot Poland" rhetoric, but Poland was baptised in 966 therefore it couldn't start in the 1000s
But medieval Polish state has been growing for a few decades before the baptism. And tell me, how's Polish history different from Slavic origins?

You would know that formation of Poland started at the end of 9th/at the begging of 10th century. But since you don't believe me, please educate yourself and read
- God's Playground: A History of Poland by Norman Davies
- The Cambridge History of Poland, Vol. 1: From the Origins to Sobieski by William Fiddian Reddaway
- The Polish Way: A Thousand-Year History of the Poles and Their Culture by Adam Zamoyski
- Studies on the begging of Polish State by Gerard Labuda and of course countless other academic books.
Did you know that Nestor had written in his Chronicle that name Polanie tribe from aroud Kiev comes from displaced population of Cherven Cities? And if White Croatians lived there in southern Poland, then why the tribe mentioned in Nestor's chronicle are not called Crotatian or something, because Nestor clearly had written about Croatians in other parts of his chronicle?

All of those WERE seperate. If Kujavians had the opportunity to dominate we would have a "Kujavia" state today and not Poland.

Bro wtf. In US census they (Kujawians etc) were mentioned as a subdivision of Polish nation. Do you deny existence of ethographic groups inside nations?

I have never seen so much BS on one page and i couldnt give less fucks about what some ultra polish dude says online.

But you didn't reply to this, just dismissed it without any meritoric response.

k.
idk why i keep reading this as i dont even have time to continue my research

Yeah, the typical "I have sources, but I don't have time" argument.

Because this is a mod about the past. And yes i admitted this issue and hopefully it will be fixed one day

Yet Wendish culture has a lot of modern names in it, and it didn't bothered you in any way? Some time ago I had written the following comment about Sorbian names in your mod:

I wasn't talking about historical names (of course they have Polish versions) and some of them come from Polabian rulers, like Krut and Ratibor.

My point is with the list of Sorbian given names used in your submod. As you said:

I'm afraid that some of the names are indeed South Slavic, not Proto-Slavic; most of them are ok. Following expamples prove my thesis:

Vuk, Vukan, Vukmir, Vukoman, Vukoslav - as Wiki says here Vuk and other variations literally mean "wolf". But original Proto-Slavic root comes from vьlkъ, which later evolved into Polish "wilk", East Slavic "volk".

Zlatan, Zlatko, Zlatoslav - as Wiki says here, the name come from adjective meaning "golden, gold". The slavic root for the latter is *zolto and if these names were Proto-Slavic, they should be Zoltan, Zoltko, Zoltoslav

Zvezdan - as Wiki says, the name comes from word meaning "star". The slavic root is gvězda, and actually only Polish retained the original version with "g" sound untouched. If the name was Proto-Slavic, it should sound something like Gvezdan.

Zdravomil, Zdravoslav come form slavic root meaning "healthy", which was sъdorvъ and Proto-Slavic version of thiese names would be Zdorvomil, Zdorvoslav.

Dragan, Dragaš, Dragija, Drago, Dragobrat, Dragomir, Dragoslav, Dragost, Dragovit, Dragoš, Dragutin, Milodrag - this site says, that these names come from root dorgъ, and if it were in Proto-Slavic form, they would sound Dorgan, Dorgaš, Dorgija, Dorgo, Dorgobrat, Dorgomir, Dorgoslav, Dorgost, Dorgovit, Dorgoš, Dorgutin, Milodorg.

These are only few examples, and I haven't toutched the female names yet.


Quod erat demontrandum, I think there is a strong point of Sorbification of Proto-Slavic names. If Sorbian language had gone extinct in at most by end date of CK2, there would be no such problem in archaisation carried out as you did. That's the reason I'm not in favor in doing separate Polabian culture (but it would be very fun to do so), because it was written down for the first time in the begining of 18th century, just few decades it died out entirely. I'm for Sorbification and Kashubisation, because these languages survived to this day, although with significant German and Polish influence, respectively. And as cultures in CK2 also refer to the culture given and place names, my point is that through Sorbification and Kashubisation it would bring back more original flavor that these launguages certainly had. I don't have degree in Slavistics, but I do have a solid grasp of knoledge of historical development of Slavic languages, especially West Slavic.

You admitted later that's issue to be fixed, but only AFTER I pointed it out in my comment.

@ShinsukeNakamura i want sorbs to be proto-slavic just like Horvats because both fade out of the cultural picture very early. Also beacuse both are imho the true proto-slavic cultures.

Ok you have a point with those names and you did a good job there. Feel free to edit and post 00_cultures.txt here as soon as you are done so i can go through your changes when i find some time.

This comment of yours implies that you were completely oblivious to what Proto-Slavic launguage was like, which is big ommision when speaking about it.

True, I will never accept "Polish" in the form of modern Poland as a cultural picture before the one AND ONLY "polish" tribe managed to even form it (with force and outside help).

Ok, so you are upset at Poland because of what? Military conquest of White Cratian land? Because I can't see it as a valid arguement.

I will never accept this downplay of the importance the "croat" and "sorb" identities had on the creation of the slavic culture itself.

I know that Tanais tablets mention three man called Horoathos, the son of Sandarz, the archons of the Tanaisians
but it's only that. So building theories based on that is a overstatement. Balts + Scythians = Slavs is just a theory among other, more widely accepted theories.

If you dont like my mod - dont use it. Good day i got RL stuff to do. I might have more time around july or from september and ongoing.

Ok, so I pointed out a few things that are debatable at best and you are running away with tail tucked between your legs?

Edit:

What this comment shows is that you have a worldview that cannot be changed no matter the counterargument provided and would rather riddicule it than argue against it.

Combined with your severe lack of understanding of modern history of West Slavs (which wouldn´t be an issue if you didn´t use events from 19th and 20th century as proofs for your theories about events happening over a millenia ago), usage of medieval chronicles (sources which, as any historian would tell you, are often not to be trusted and should be read with grain of salt) combined with articles from Wikipedia as your provided sources (articles which often refer to afforementioned chronicles or have no links whatsoever), the fact that you consider yourelf an expert on all early Slavs (a statement that even many historians or archaeologists would be cautious to make), I am lead to believe that you are someone who might know about wide range of topics regarding early Slavs on surface level, but you rarely, if ever dig deeper.

Which is an easy way to end up misinformed, yet believing you are smarter than everyone else. That seems to be the case, given that you are willing to handwave disagreement as coming from butthurt people from other Slavic nations.


This is public forum. By putting your creation on a public forum, you are opening it to feedback and said feedback can be negative just as it can be positive.
To paraphrase what you said: If you don´t like feedback - don´t make your work public.

Thank you for this comment, it's a lot shorter than mine and accurately describes what I'm trying to say for past few days.

 

[TheDovahkiin97]

Ok, so I pointed out a few things that are debatable at best and you are running away with tail tucked between your legs?

yes im running away from endless discussions which lead nowhere. if you came aroud 4-5 months ago i could see myself arguing with you. right now i am not able to. so please dont challenge my inner autist who will not let me ignore this thread
and i couldnt care less if any of you disaproves of my views

everyone who uses my mod for a longer time knows that i compatched on the same day HIP realeased something. If even this is no longer possible i dont see how any of you really thinks that i have the nerve, time or whatever to argue here about basically anything.
I feel the HIP devs rn bcs they appeared like assholes back then but now i understand that i was just the little shit with way more time and energy to push my bs nobody cared about.
Suddenly people care but i guess things changed.
If ck3 doesnt take over completely i will come back eventually and mod all those things i have planned to mod long ago. Better Slavs was just the beginning. literally v1.0 of all the things i want to do outside of the balkans.
However until then i will release compatches but thats probably it.

 

[Pressburger]

It's me again. Since Pomeranian uses a mix of Czech and Polish names (with inconsistent orthography) I recompiled the Pomeranian names based on:
1. Names of historical Slavic lords in the area of Pomerania and Mecklenburg (using variants that are preferably A. not German B. not Polish C. more archaic)
2. Online-submitted Kashubian names (using A. more archaic variants B. slight edits to the orthography to make them more uniform with names from point 1)
3. Vanilla Pomeranian and HIP Czech and Polish names that could pass as "Pomeranian" (with slight edits again to make them conform to points 1 and 2)

I did not really touch female names, just made them all write W instead of V, so they're at least somewhat consistent.

Again as with the Sorbs, it might not be perfect, but I enjoy it more than the vanilla Pomeranian names.

pommeranian = {
        graphical_cultures = { westernslavicgfx }
        color = { 0.4 0.6 0.4 }
        male_names = {
            Jadrzej_Andrew
            Barnim Bogislaw_Boguslaw Boleslaw_Boleslav Burislaw Boriwoj_Borijov Branimir Branislaw Bretislaw_Bretislaus Bogus_Boguslaw Borzeslaw_Boreslav
            Czeslow_Caslav
            Dobieslaw Dobromil Dobromir Dobrogost_Dobrogost Dalimil Dalimir
            Gabriel_Gabriel Gniewomir Gregor_Gregory Gerat_Gerard
            Henk_Henry
            Chocemir
            Jakob_Jacub Jacek_Hyacinth Jaczo Jaromar_Jaromir Jacaty_Hyacinth Jadom_Adam Jaroslaw_Jaroslav Jozef_Joseph Janislaw_John Jan_John
            Karel_Charles Kasimir_Casimir Kresimir Krzeslaw Kresztof_Christopher
            Lubomir Lazôrz_Lazarus Leszk_Leszek Lubogost
            Marek_Marcus Mestwin_Mestwin Marian_Marius Martin_Martin Miloslaw Miroslaw Macej_Matthias Michol_Michael Mieczeslaw Marcen_Martin
            Niklot_Nicholas Nadbor
            Oto_Otto Ôns_John Olgerd_Holger
            Pawel_Paul Pioter_Peter Pribislaw Przemeslaw_Premysl
            Racibor Radoslaw Redomir_Radomir
            Sambor Siemomysl Swantibor Swantepolk_Svatopluk Sobieslaw_Sobeslaus Swienca Sadomir Slawomir Slawibor_Slavibor Sobieslaw_Sobeslaus Stanislaw_Stanislav Sztefon_Stephen Sedzimir Stoignew_Stoignew Sulislaw
            Tetislaw Tomosz_Thomas Urbon_Urbanus Twardomir
            Wartislaw_Vratislav Witslaw Waclaw_Vaclav Waldemar_Vladimir Wieslaw_Wieslaw Witold Wladislaw_Vladislav Wojcech_Albert Wladimir_Vladimir
            Zbigorz_Zbynek Zdzyslaw
        }
        female_names = {
            Agnieszka_Agnes Alzbeta_Elisabeth Andela Anna_Anna Berta_Berta Bohuslawa Bozena Branislawa Dagmar
            Danuta Dobrawy Dobroniega Dorota_Dorothy Dragomira Edyta_Edith Ewa_Eva Geira Gertruda_Gertrude Gracja
            Grazyna Halina Hanna Irena_Irene Izabela_Elisabeth Jadwiga_Hedwig Jarka Jarmila Jolanta_Yolanda
            Judyta_Judith Kamila Katarina_Catherine Kenna Kornelia Krystyna_Christina Ksenia Lidia_Lidia Ludmila
            Magda_Magdalena Magdalena_Magdalena Malgorzata Marcelina Maria_Maria Markéta_Margaret Martyna Mateja
            Matylda_Matilda Milena Miroslawa_Miroslava Pechna_Berchte Róza_Rosa Radomila Radomira Radoslawa Raina
            Regelinda_Regenlint Rycheza_Ricarda Salomea_Salomea Smiechna Stanislawa Stefana_Stephania Swetlana
            Urszula Wáclawa Wladislawa Wera Wojslawa Zdenka Zofia_Sophia Zwinislawa
           
            Pribislawa Dobroslawa Margareta Pritolawa Woislawa Miroslawa Matilda Jutta_Bonne Witoslawa Miloslawa Sulislawa
        }
        from_dynasty_prefix = "z "
        modifier = pommeranian_culture_modifier
        allow_looting = yes
        seafarer = yes
    }

 

[ShinsukeNakamura]

It's me again. Since Pomeranian uses a mix of Czech and Polish names (with inconsistent orthography) I recompiled the Pomeranian names based on:
1. Names of historical Slavic lords in the area of Pomerania and Mecklenburg (using variants that are preferably A. not German B. not Polish C. more archaic)
2. Online-submitted Kashubian names (using A. more archaic variants B. slight edits to the orthography to make them more uniform with names from point 1)
3. Vanilla Pomeranian and HIP Czech and Polish names that could pass as "Pomeranian" (with slight edits again to make them conform to points 1 and 2)

I did not really touch female names, just made them all write W instead of V, so they're at least somewhat consistent.

Again as with the Sorbs, it might not be perfect, but I enjoy it more than the vanilla Pomeranian names.

pommeranian = {
        graphical_cultures = { westernslavicgfx }
        color = { 0.4 0.6 0.4 }
        male_names = {
            Jadrzej_Andrew
            Barnim Bogislaw_Boguslaw Boleslaw_Boleslav Burislaw Boriwoj_Borijov Branimir Branislaw Bretislaw_Bretislaus Bogus_Boguslaw Borzeslaw_Boreslav
            Czeslow_Caslav
            Dobieslaw Dobromil Dobromir Dobrogost_Dobrogost Dalimil Dalimir
            Gabriel_Gabriel Gniewomir Gregor_Gregory Gerat_Gerard
            Henk_Henry
            Chocemir
            Jakob_Jacub Jacek_Hyacinth Jaczo Jaromar_Jaromir Jacaty_Hyacinth Jadom_Adam Jaroslaw_Jaroslav Jozef_Joseph Janislaw_John Jan_John
            Karel_Charles Kasimir_Casimir Kresimir Krzeslaw Kresztof_Christopher
            Lubomir Lazôrz_Lazarus Leszk_Leszek Lubogost
            Marek_Marcus Mestwin_Mestwin Marian_Marius Martin_Martin Miloslaw Miroslaw Macej_Matthias Michol_Michael Mieczeslaw Marcen_Martin
            Niklot_Nicholas Nadbor
            Oto_Otto Ôns_John Olgerd_Holger
            Pawel_Paul Pioter_Peter Pribislaw Przemeslaw_Premysl
            Racibor Radoslaw Redomir_Radomir
            Sambor Siemomysl Swantibor Swantepolk_Svatopluk Sobieslaw_Sobeslaus Swienca Sadomir Slawomir Slawibor_Slavibor Sobieslaw_Sobeslaus Stanislaw_Stanislav Sztefon_Stephen Sedzimir Stoignew_Stoignew Sulislaw
            Tetislaw Tomosz_Thomas Urbon_Urbanus Twardomir
            Wartislaw_Vratislav Witslaw Waclaw_Vaclav Waldemar_Vladimir Wieslaw_Wieslaw Witold Wladislaw_Vladislav Wojcech_Albert Wladimir_Vladimir
            Zbigorz_Zbynek Zdzyslaw
        }
        female_names = {
            Agnieszka_Agnes Alzbeta_Elisabeth Andela Anna_Anna Berta_Berta Bohuslawa Bozena Branislawa Dagmar
            Danuta Dobrawy Dobroniega Dorota_Dorothy Dragomira Edyta_Edith Ewa_Eva Geira Gertruda_Gertrude Gracja
            Grazyna Halina Hanna Irena_Irene Izabela_Elisabeth Jadwiga_Hedwig Jarka Jarmila Jolanta_Yolanda
            Judyta_Judith Kamila Katarina_Catherine Kenna Kornelia Krystyna_Christina Ksenia Lidia_Lidia Ludmila
            Magda_Magdalena Magdalena_Magdalena Malgorzata Marcelina Maria_Maria Markéta_Margaret Martyna Mateja
            Matylda_Matilda Milena Miroslawa_Miroslava Pechna_Berchte Róza_Rosa Radomila Radomira Radoslawa Raina
            Regelinda_Regenlint Rycheza_Ricarda Salomea_Salomea Smiechna Stanislawa Stefana_Stephania Swetlana
            Urszula Wáclawa Wladislawa Wera Wojslawa Zdenka Zofia_Sophia Zwinislawa
        
            Pribislawa Dobroslawa Margareta Pritolawa Woislawa Miroslawa Matilda Jutta_Bonne Witoslawa Miloslawa Sulislawa
        }
        from_dynasty_prefix = "z "
        modifier = pommeranian_culture_modifier
        allow_looting = yes
        seafarer = yes
    }

@Pressburger Those names a lot better than the vanilla ones and easily replace currently used ones, at least CK3.
For personal enjoyment I compiled the following list of Wendish names (Wendish = Polabian + Pomeranian). My goal was to remove christian, foreign (mostly German and culture-specific) and modern names. Then I added names for historical Polabian and Pomeranian rulers and I kashubised them, but not entirely. Pomeranians and Polabians last slaivc cultures to be bapised and even after the christianisation they retained a lot slavic names. As time goes, and the more I read, the more I want to create West Slavic submod, and one feature would be making separate Pomeranian and Polabian culture, each with unique names, titles and localisation. As for now, my compliled list of Pomeranian names looks like this:

pommeranian = {
        graphical_cultures = { westernslavicgfx }
        color = { 0.4 0.6 0.4 }
        male_names = {
Barnim Bňgusláw_Boguslaw Bňgdán_Bogdan Bňgumir_Bogumir Bňlesláw_Boleslav Bňrzywój_Borijov
Bňzydar_Theodat Barnimir_Branimir Barnisláw_Bronislaw Brzecisláw_Bretislaus Kazmir_Casimir
Czcibór_Ctibor Czescibór Czedarg Dobiesláw Dobromil_Dobromil Dobromir_Dobromir Dobromysl
Drazko Drosuk Dargňwit_Drogovit Gniew Gniewňmir Gostomysl Grzymisław 
Jaromil Jaromir_Jaromir Jarosláw_Jaroslav Krut Krzesimir Krzesláw Lech Leszek 
Lubňmir_Lubomir Mieszko Milogňst Milosláw Mirosláw_Miroslaw Mscisláw_Mstislav 
Msciwój Nakňn Niklot Przemysl_Premysl Przesláw Przybygniew Przybysláw Racibór Radomil 
Radomir Radosláw Roscisláw Sambňr Siemňmysl Slawňmir Sobiesláw_Sobeslaus 
Stanisláw_Stanislav Stojgniew Swiatobór Swiatopolk_Svatopluk Swiatosláw_Sviatoslav 
Tegňmir Wňjciech_Albert Wacláw_Vaclav Warcisláw_Vratislav Wiczan Wisláw 
Wlodysláv_Vladislav Wlodzimirz Zbygniew_Zbynek Zdzysláw Stojsláw Borzeta Przedbor 
Domabor Dalimir Cieszymir Niedamir Goscisláw
}

female_names = {

Bňgùslawa Bňzena Barnislawa Brzecislawa Dabrówka Damroka Dobroniega Dargňmira 
Jarka Jarmila Krzeslawa Ludmila Małomira Milena Miroslawa Mscigniewa Przybyslawa 
Róza_Rosa Radomila Radomira Radoslawa Scibora Slawina Smiechna Sobieslawa 
Stanislawa Swiatoslava Witoslawa Wlodislawa Wera Wojslawa Zdenka Zwinislawa
}
        from_dynasty_prefix = "z "
        male_patronym = "owy"
        #female_patronym = "ówna"
        modifier = pommeranian_culture_modifier
        allow_looting = yes
        seafarer = yes
    }

ň = ò, á/é/ó = long vowels. I didn't turn short i/y/u into "ë" because this vowel shift occured only in north Kashubian dialects in the 16th-17th century, just before Polabian lanugage died out. Also, Polabian dialects around Luneburg reduced some of it's vowels in completely different way.

 

[Pressburger]

@Pressburger
For personal enjoyment I compiled the following list of Wendish names (Wendish = Polabian + Pomeranian).

These are great! I think I will use your list instead.

 

[Erilaz]

*snip*

That's quite good, except I see a lot of foreign (e.g. Oto, Olgerd...) and Christian names in there.

*snip*

Those are great! Are you sure all of the letters and diacritics work in-game?

I'm tempted simply to integrate your naming list into NHO, perhaps even go through the character history file to correct existing characters. I already, a long time ago made some preliminary tweaks to the Wendish/Pommeranian culture, creating some theoretical title localization for them, and renaming from "Vendi" to "Wenedi" (for lack of a better ethnonym to cover the various divisions).

Here's the titles I renamed (don't be too hard on me with regards to mistakes, some of the letters and diacritics I wanted to use didn't work, so I had to use some creative letter combination, e.g. "kjenazh" instead of "ťėnąʒ" - it's better than before at the least):

Spoiler

########################################;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;
#Pommeranian;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;
########################################;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;
baron_pommeranian;Wódz;Wódz;Wódz;;Wódz;;;;;;;;;x
baron_female_pommeranian;Dama;Dama;Dama;;Dama;;;;;;;;;x
baron_title_ruler_consort_pommeranian;Wódz;Wódz;Wódz;;Wódz;;;;;;;;;x
baron_title_ruler_consort_female_pommeranian;Dama;Dama;Dama;;Dama;;;;;;;;;x
count_pommeranian;Wódz;Wódz;Wódz;;Wódz;;;;;;;;;x
count_female_pommeranian;Dama;Dama;Dama;;Dama;;;;;;;;;x
count_title_ruler_consort_pommeranian;Wódz;Wódz;Wódz;;Wódz;;;;;;;;;x
count_title_ruler_consort_female_pommeranian;Dama;Dama;Dama;;Dama;;;;;;;;;x
duke_pommeranian;Wojwoda;Wojwoda;Wojwoda;;Wojwoda;;;;;;;;;x
duke_female_pommeranian;Dama;Dama;Dama;;Dama;;;;;;;;;x
duke_title_ruler_consort_pommeranian;Wojwoda;Wojwoda;Wojwoda;;Wojwoda;;;;;;;;;x
duke_title_ruler_consort_female_pommeranian;Dama;Dama;Dama;;Dama;;;;;;;;;x
king_pommeranian;Kjenazh;Kjenazh;Kjenazh;;Kjenazh;;;;;;;;;x
king_female_pommeranian;Kjenazhna;Kjenazhna;Kjenazhna;;Kjenazhna;;;;;;;;;x
king_title_ruler_consort_pommeranian;Kjenazh;Kjenazh;Kjenazh;;Kjenazh;;;;;;;;;x
king_title_ruler_consort_female_pommeranian;Kjenazhna;Kjenazhna;Kjenazhna;;Kjenazhna;;;;;;;;;x
emperor_pommeranian;Cesarz;Cesarz;Cesarz;;Cesarz;;;;;;;;;x
emperor_female_pommeranian;Cesarzowa;Cesarzowa;Cesarzowa;;Cesarzowa;;;;;;;;;x
emperor_title_ruler_consort_female_pommeranian;Cesarzowa;Cesarzowa;Cesarzowa;;Cesarzowa;;;;;;;;;x
city_baron_pommeranian;Wójt;Wójt;Wójt;;Wójt;;;;;;;;;x
city_count_pommeranian;Wójt;Wójt;Wójt;;Wójt;;;;;;;;;x
city_duke_pommeranian;Wójt;Wójt;Wójt;;Wójt;;;;;;;;;x
########################################;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;
#TRIBALPommeranian;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;
########################################;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;
tribal_baron_pommeranian;Wódz;Wódz;Wódz;;Wódz;;;;;;;;;x
tribal_baron_female_pommeranian;Dama;Dama;Dama;;Dama;;;;;;;;;x
tribal_baron_title_ruler_consort_pommeranian;Wódz;Wódz;Wódz;;Wódz;;;;;;;;;x
tribal_baron_title_ruler_consort_female_pommeranian;Dama;Dama;Dama;;Dama;;;;;;;;;x
tribal_count_pommeranian;Wódz;Wódz;Wódz;;Wódz;;;;;;;;;x
tribal_count_female_pommeranian;Dama;Dama;Dama;;Dama;;;;;;;;;x
tribal_count_title_ruler_consort_pommeranian;Wódz;Wódz;Wódz;;Wódz;;;;;;;;;x
tribal_count_title_ruler_consort_female_pommeranian;Dama;Dama;Dama;;Dama;;;;;;;;;x
tribal_duke_pommeranian;Wojwoda;Wojwoda;Wojwoda;;Wojwoda;;;;;;;;;x
tribal_duke_female_pommeranian;Dama;Dama;Dama;;Dama;;;;;;;;;x
tribal_duke_title_ruler_consort_pommeranian;Wojwoda;Wojwoda;Wojwoda;;Wojwoda;;;;;;;;;x
tribal_duke_title_ruler_consort_female_pommeranian;Dama;Dama;Dama;;Dama;;;;;;;;;x
tribal_king_pommeranian;Kjenazh;Kjenazh;Kjenazh;;Kjenazh;;;;;;;;;x
tribal_king_female_pommeranian;Kjenazhna;Kjenazhna;Kjenazhna;;Kjenazhna;;;;;;;;;x
tribal_king_title_ruler_consort_pommeranian;Kjenazh;Kjenazh;Kjenazh;;Kjenazh;;;;;;;;;x
tribal_king_title_ruler_consort_female_pommeranian;Kjenazhna;Kjenazhna;Kjenazhna;;Kjenazhna;;;;;;;;;x
tribal_emperor_pommeranian;Cesarz;Cesarz;Cesarz;;Cesarz;;;;;;;;;x
tribal_emperor_female_pommeranian;Cesarzowa;Cesarzowa;Cesarzowa;;Cesarzowa;;;;;;;;;x
tribal_emperor_title_ruler_consort_female_pommeranian;Cesarzowa;Cesarzowa;Cesarzowa;;Cesarzowa;;;;;;;;;x
tribal_city_baron_pommeranian;Wójt;Wójt;Wójt;;Wójt;;;;;;;;;x
tribal_city_count_pommeranian;Wójt;Wójt;Wójt;;Wójt;;;;;;;;;x
tribal_city_duke_pommeranian;Wójt;Wójt;Wójt;;Wójt;;;;;;;;;x

 

[ShinsukeNakamura]

@Erilaz I just saw your comment, I'll PM you over the weekend about some changes I would make.

 

[Erilaz]

@Erilaz I just saw your comment, I'll PM you over the weekend about some changes I would make.

Thanks!

 

[Smartguy725]

It's... been a while since I checked on this mod

Last I remember, I think the Bulgar changes were the most notable. What's the debate around the White Croats/Horvatski, and are those Sorbs from a split Wendish amalgamation I see?

 

[TheDovahkiin97]

UPDATE 8.3:

- compatch for Frosty3
- The Slavic Faith is renamed to "Svetoslavstvo"
- Vrhbosna is now Bosnian from 867
- Added condition to the bosnian culture spread event: Any neighbouring province has to be bosnian. (So vrhbosna has to survive until 1010 and the religious authority of any Christianity in Donji Kraji, Rama or Podrinje has to fall below 30%)

 

[BallsOfSteelBaby]

I see a lot of good points with good rhetorics and fine sources made by @ShinsukeNakamura just ignored or ridiculed by you, the author. It's a shame I didn't check the thread before, as now the mod is integrated with my modlist and it will be hard to remove it.
Anyway I've noticed your 00_bloodlines file has a wrong name ie. "00_bloodines" (no 'l'). Is this intentional?

 

[TheDovahkiin97]

I see a lot of good points with good rhetorics and fine sources made by @ShinsukeNakamura just ignored or ridiculed by you, the author. It's a shame I didn't check the thread before, as now the mod is integrated with my modlist and it will be hard to remove it.
Anyway I've noticed your 00_bloodlines file has a wrong name ie. "00_bloodines" (no 'l'). Is this intentional?

Regarding the error: no
Regarding the sources: i dont think that any of those are good in any way but i do get that they might sound okayish for someone without in depth knowledge. However i failed at providing good sources and quotes myself as i had absolutely no time to finish the mod or at least explain it better. I might do it the following months tho

 

[Choorus]

Regarding the error: no
Regarding the sources: i dont think that any of those are good in any way but i do get that they might sound okayish for someone without in depth knowledge. However i failed at providing good sources and quotes myself as i had absolutely no time to finish the mod or at least explain it better. I might do it the following months tho

Please do provide the sources for the Chrobatian kingdom especially.