Another building slot from universities wouldn't solve that. Just make the shuffle even more important.
Stop changing the Goal Post, Naples proves your point wrong there was Kingdoms name after cities.
The vikings had been gone for 400 years when eu4 starts! The people of that day had as much in common with vikings as we do with the witch hunts.By citing history as it happened? Danish were elective monarchy, the treaty of Kalmar as it was written, the succession and disputes over them... I agreed the reasons could speculative, but many of your arguments are historical wrong or doesn´t take into account of what transpired prior or under. So pardon me for having a "skewed" perspective when looking at things objectively and not arguing that historical things like a treaty and succession laws are not like they are known.
Denmark went away from elective monarchy in ca. 1700, which were roughly 100 years after Sweden...
The buildings were similar, the language were similar, their heritage were similar, their customs were similar, their genes are more similar than fins too (please note a say similar, not equal). The whole history since and during the vikings were intertwined both political, cultural and historical to each other and claims on each three kingdoms were often made at different times also supporting the association with each other.
Even the swedes I know have shared this view that we have more in common, apart from the obvious rivalry that have grown over into football. The rise of recent speculation of a union again like the Kalmar that began just after WW2 and began as the nordic council, also suggest that they are more similar as do most historians recoignize the historical and cultural similarities. Many of the laws are similar and some of the laws even have joint preparations with at least Sweden, Norway and Denmark which makes many of our laws similar. And then there is the scandinavism that were formed in the 19th that was based on the beliefs based on the common ethnic, linguistic, political and cultural heritage of the Scandinavian countries of Denmark, Sweden and Norway.
Yes these things are not by themselves proof of the similarities, but the sheer amount of these things are a heavy indicator at least. And I disagree that cultural spheres are only linked by the seas, since the three nations relied and intertwined heavily with each other, in part due to their heritage and common culture which made things a lot easier.
Again, you are welcome to sent in private
There was one kingdom named after a city. And remember that kingdom lost it's independence before eu4 started and never (asfaik) regained it. You can't really talk of naples as a kingdom in the EU4 era since it was just another title held by the kings of aragon and later spain.
So perhaps denamrk has some more eastern europe in it than it would like to owe up to as well. The hansa traded mainly in the batlic but compared to the fact that germany was created by prussia I don't think the cultural influences of that matter that much. But germany has a diffrent realtion to it's eastern roots. There are plety of germans who still was prussia back (at least after a few beers).Both Denmark and Hansa traded East too, was livonia or estonia not part of the Danish rule?
With that argument, Venice would be more similar with Mongolia, they sailed and travelled east to trade with Mongolia and did so for many years... does that make them Mongolian???
I see no reason why Finland, Baltic stages couldn't be part of the union, they have much in common and are enough similar to make it work
Was Naples a Kingdom Rank title during the timeframe? Yes or No
I've already responded to this, Rome got it's name in a very diffrent time. The empire of Byzantium never existed it's just a word we use for the roman empire after it became greek.
Now who's twisting words the only thing I attributed to dick harrisson was the part about scanian having a separate origin from swedish and danish.Twisting my words... But I did ask Dick Harrison about your statement of Swedish and Finnish culture, he assumed you had mistaken him since he had never stated that swedish culture were apart from danish and norwergian, he even went as far as saying that they in fact did share a lots of cultural similarities with them.
The union is not unlikely, since they are already cooperating on a number of things, and they are discussion of more ways to cooperate and the Nordic council have existed for over 60 years, so the issue with language is not that big of a deal. Since there are some ways to make such a union that doesn´t require much administration and the laws are quite similar anyway, I´ll assume that´s your political stand and respect that
Because we are not vikings, the vikings are just one facet of our past. In fact realtivly few of our ancestors will have been vikings, remember 90% of the people of the norse countries were farmers and fishermen who never left the land they were born in. And the vast majority of those who did go else where were mercenaries and traders not raiders and conquerors.Hey, what is wrong with being hopped up in national romantic ideas of the viking legacy.
