• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.

DONGHAIZHIDABIE

Second Lieutenant
19 Badges
Jan 25, 2023
120
216
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Europa Universalis 4: Emperor
  • Crusader Kings III: Royal Edition
  • Crusader Kings III
  • Europa Universalis IV: Golden Century
  • Europa Universalis IV: Dharma
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rule Britannia
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cradle of Civilization
  • Europa Universalis IV: Third Rome
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mandate of Heaven
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
According to Oaths of Strasbourg, Louis the German and Charles the Bald should know other's language.
That is to say they should both master D'Oïl Vulgar and High German like their nephews.
1694773854335.png
1694773881205.png
 
  • 4
  • 2
Reactions:
Wasn’t it the troops who recited it? But, yeah, from what I understand, they both lived at time that old French started being spoken. Born before the earliest potential date to choose for the split of the Franks into Franconian and French. In game, any character that lived before their culture diverged or hybridized should probably know their old culture’s language too. Old high German and old french are two languages derived from Frankish.
 
  • 1
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Wasn’t it the troops who recited it? But, yeah, from what I understand, they both lived at time that old French started being spoken. Born before the earliest potential date to choose for the split of the Franks into Franconian and French. In game, any character that lived before their culture diverged or hybridized should probably know their old culture’s language too. Old high German and old french are two languages derived from Frankish.
You're right. At least it is certain that Louis took the oath in Old French like Charles's soldiers, after which Charles' soldiers swore an oath to Louis in Old High German.

The setting in vanilla is slightly strange. Franconian was born in 640 from the Franks, while French was born in 862 from the Franks. The culture of many historical characters does not fit this setting. I also don't know what the significance of these two moments is.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
You're right. At least it is certain that Louis took the oath in Old French like Charles's soldiers, after which Charles' soldiers swore an oath to Louis in Old High German.

The setting in vanilla is slightly strange. Franconian was born in 640 from the Franks, while French was born in 862 from the Franks. The culture of many historical characters does not fit this setting. I also don't know what the significance of these two moments is.
The oath is actually the earliest recorded use of old French.

Unless Louis the Pious dropped the ball on his son’s education, Charles should know high German, and Ludwig should know French.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Wasn’t it the troops who recited it? But, yeah, from what I understand, they both lived at time that old French started being spoken. Born before the earliest potential date to choose for the split of the Franks into Franconian and French. In game, any character that lived before their culture diverged or hybridized should probably know their old culture’s language too. Old high German and old french are two languages derived from Frankish.
Old French is not derived from Frankish. Old French is a Gallo-Romance language derived from Latin. It was influenced by Frankish and other Germanic dialects (mostly vocabulary but may also things like V2 word order and the umlaut vowels).
 
  • 4Like
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
You're right. At least it is certain that Louis took the oath in Old French like Charles's soldiers, after which Charles' soldiers swore an oath to Louis in Old High German.

The setting in vanilla is slightly strange. Franconian was born in 640 from the Franks, while French was born in 862 from the Franks. The culture of many historical characters does not fit this setting. I also don't know what the significance of these two moments is.
I would expect the culture might not line up. Frankish was spoken by the warrior elite and not the general population. Now whether the game models that correctly or not I don't know because I haven't looked at the characters in detail. But it would be understandable if the culture of even the elite had taken on French characteristics while they still spoke Frankish.
 
  • 2Like
Reactions:
I would expect the culture might not line up. Frankish was spoken by the warrior elite and not the general population. Now whether the game models that correctly or not I don't know because I haven't looked at the characters in detail. But it would be understandable if the culture of even the elite had taken on French characteristics while they still spoke Frankish.

Exactly what I was going to write. This ; the frankish aristocracy wasn't using old langue d'oil at the time.
 
  • 1
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Old French is not derived from Frankish. Old French is a Gallo-Romance language derived from Latin. It was influenced by Frankish and other Germanic dialects (mostly vocabulary but may also things like V2 word order and the umlaut vowels).
Frankish language had a heavy influence on French. Obviously, French is a Latin derived language, hence the term Romance language, but to deny the heavy influence Frankish had on it is wrong. While being derived is not technically correct, Frankish had as much influence on the language as Norman French did on the development of Middle English, if not more.
 
  • 2Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Frankish language had a heavy influence on French. Obviously, French is a Latin derived language, hence the term Romance language, but to deny the heavy influence Frankish had on it is wrong. While being derived is not technically correct, Frankish had as much influence on the language as Norman French did on the development of Middle English, if not more.
I don't think this is the case. There are a few hundred or so words of Frankish origin in French, most of which are related to the military, and not all of which survive today. In comparison, English has thousands of words of French origin due to Norman influence.

Also, I didn't deny the influence. It's literally in the last sentence of my post. Did you downvote me because you didn't read?
 
  • 3Like
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
I don't think this is the case. There are a few hundred or so words of Frankish origin in French, most of which are related to the military, and not all of which survive today. In comparison, English has thousands of words of French origin due to Norman influence.

Also, I didn't deny the influence. It's literally in the last sentence of my post. Did you downvote me because you didn't read?
Old French was more Frankish in origin than modern French.
 
  • 2
  • 1Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Old French was more Frankish in origin than modern French.
No, it really isn't. The language is through-and-through a Romance language, in grammar, phonetics, sound changes and vocabulary. It had some Frankish influence in some areas of vocabulary and perhaps certain phonological tendencies (the biggest being the reduction of unstressed syllables -- typical of Germanic languages, but also shared partly by other Romance languages) and maybe the V2 word order. But it's really hard to find even evidence of heavy influence in any aspect of the language. If you want to point out some things that are core parts of Old French that were derived from Frankish or heavily influence by it, I'd be happy to look at it.

You have to remember that the Frankish invaders were relatively small in number and did not settle much in Gaul. They were a warrior elite, supported by a Gallo-Roman aristocracy, and they were quickly subsumed into the culture and eventually language of the region. It's much different from, say, Britain where the Germanic invaders must have come in great enough numbers to displace the language and culture of the sub-Roman Britons. Notably, Old English, a very much Germanic language, came out of that period, not some sort of Celtic or hybrid. If your claim is true, Old French would look a lot more like Frankish or Old High German or Old English, but it absolutely does not. Having studied those languages, I can confidently say that Old French looks a lot like watered down Latin.
 
  • 3Like
  • 3
  • 1
Reactions:
French and older oil are latin language and have almost no influence from francique.

The closest languages of french are : Italian, Spanish and Portuguese all latin language

English comes just after but for other reasons
 
  • 2Like
Reactions:
What 867 could have looked like, but leads to the problem of the latin-speaking commoners and germanic elite.
Also how to split them well with possible edge cases.

20230915184427_1.jpg
 
  • 1
  • 1
  • 1Like
Reactions:
No, it really isn't. The language is through-and-through a Romance language, in grammar, phonetics, sound changes and vocabulary. It had some Frankish influence in some areas of vocabulary and perhaps certain phonological tendencies (the biggest being the reduction of unstressed syllables -- typical of Germanic languages, but also shared partly by other Romance languages) and maybe the V2 word order. But it's really hard to find even evidence of heavy influence in any aspect of the language. If you want to point out some things that are core parts of Old French that were derived from Frankish or heavily influence by it, I'd be happy to look at it.

You have to remember that the Frankish invaders were relatively small in number and did not settle much in Gaul. They were a warrior elite, supported by a Gallo-Roman aristocracy, and they were quickly subsumed into the culture and eventually language of the region. It's much different from, say, Britain where the Germanic invaders must have come in great enough numbers to displace the language and culture of the sub-Roman Britons. Notably, Old English, a very much Germanic language, came out of that period, not some sort of Celtic or hybrid. If your claim is true, Old French would look a lot more like Frankish or Old High German or Old English, but it absolutely does not. Having studied those languages, I can confidently say that Old French looks a lot like watered down Latin.
You’re describing the situation in Neustria pretty well. The situation in Austrasia, which included territories on both sides of the Roman-Germanic border, was slightly different, there the situation in the former Roman territories was more like Roman Britain.
OTOH there were Celts, Germano-Celts, Celto-Germanics, becoming more Germanic closer to the border. In time the even currently existing language border evolved, even when quite some language pockets existed.
There the Franks also had the advantage, that relatively unpopulated* Roman lands bordered their homelands, this was different in Neustria, which had kept a relatively high Gallo-Roman population.
It’s also wrong to say, that the various Germanic tribes, only Romanised culturally (not linguistically) after entering the Roman Empire. They had been under Roman cultural influence ever since the Romans reached the Rhine and Danube, not to mention many Germanic warriors had served in the Roman army centuries before the Great Migration Period.

(*= as noted at least part of the population there was already Germanic)
 
Last edited:
  • 1
  • 1
  • 1Like
Reactions:
What 867 could have looked like, but leads to the problem of the latin-speaking commoners and germanic elite.
Also how to split them well with possible edge cases.

View attachment 1022824
Even this is wrong, parts of the Dutch speaking area like Flanders, Brabant were as Germanic Frankish as their cousins in Franconia and the Rhineland. Much of the coastal Low Countries were Frisian, while Gelre (Guelders) was split between Frankish (south west) and Saxon (north east).

However between Franconian (Franconia & Rhineland) and Low Franconian/Frankish there also grew a difference with the former undergoing a Consonant Shift, like Bavarian and Swabian, while Low Franconian wasn’t affected like Saxon. There the process from Low Frankish to Old Dutch starts.
 
  • 3Like
  • 1
Reactions:
You’re describing the situation in Neustria pretty well. The situation in Austrasia, which included territories on both sides of the Roman-Germanic border, was slightly different, there the situation in the former Roman territories was more like Roman Britain.
OTOH there were Celts, Germano-Celts, Celto -Germanics, becoming more Germanic closer to the border. In time the even currently existing language border evolved, even when quite some tone language pockets existed.
There the Franks also had the advantage, that relatively unpopulated* Roman lands bordered their homelands, this was different in Neustria, which had kept a relatively high Gallo-Roman population.
It’s also wrong to say, that the various Germanic tribes, only Romanised culturally (not linguistically) after entering the Roman Empire. They had been under Roman cultural influence ever since the Romans reached the Rhine and Danube, not to mention many Germanic warriors had served in the Roman army centuries before the Great Migration Period.

(*= as noted at least part of the population there was already Germanic)
Well, yes, in the border lands and the places that were never under Roman control, obviously it was mostly Germanic speakers. But they also weren't speaking Old French, which is what is in question here.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Well, yes, in the border lands and the places that were never under Roman control, obviously it was mostly Germanic speakers. But they also weren't speaking Old French, which is what is in question here.
To nitpick, this is not entirely true, Austrasia always included Metz, there the Westen part was Romance speaking and the Eastern part Germanic speaking.
Places like Flanders, Hainaut (with Tournai/Doornik), Brabant and parts of Picardy belonged to Austrasia, here the Northern (larger part, though not necessarily more populous) spoke Germanic, the southern part spoke Romance.
Here the border between Austrasia and Neustria diverges a bit from the later border between West Francia and Middle, later East Francia, where the most western part of Austrasia ended up with West Francia.
Concluding Austrasia, though mostly Germanic speaking, had some regions with a Romance speaking majority. The Romance of those regions also belong to the Langues d’Oil.
 
  • 2Like
  • 1
Reactions:
To nitpick, this is not entirely true, Austrasia always included Metz, there the Westen part was Romance speaking and the Eastern part Germanic speaking.
Places like Flanders, Hainaut (with Tournai/Doornik), Brabant and parts of Picardy belonged to Austrasia, here the Northern (larger part, though not necessarily more populous) spoke Germanic, the southern part spoke Romance.
Here the border between Austrasia and Neustria diverges a bit from the later border between West Francia and Middle, later East Francia, where the most western part of Austrasia ended up with West Francia.
Concluding Austrasia, though mostly Germanic speaking, had some regions with a Romance speaking majority. The Romance of those regions also belong to the Langues d’Oil.
It's definitely a nitpick. Old French didn't originate in Germanic speaking areas, no matter where the boundaries are drawn. These details aren't really relevant to the discussion to be honest, other than that there was some Germanic influence on Romance languages in the general border areas (not surprising and hardly unique).
 
  • 1
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Even this is wrong, parts of the Dutch speaking area like Flanders, Brabant were as Germanic Frankish as their cousins in Franconia and the Rhineland. Much of the coastal Low Countries were Frisian, while Gelre (Guelders) was split between Frankish (south west) and Saxon (north east).

However between Franconian (Franconia & Rhineland) and Low Franconian/Frankish there also grew a difference with the former undergoing a Consonant Shift, like Bavarian and Swabian, while Low Franconian wasn’t affected like Saxon. There the process from Low Frankish to Old Dutch starts.
There's probably a reasonable arguement that Dutch shouldn't exist at all in 867, instead being split between Saxon, Frisian and Franconian/Frankish.

One other thing that doesn't make sense; why are there separate 'West Germanic' and 'Central Germanic' heritages?
 
  • 2Like
  • 1
Reactions: