Only change in cultural setup I wish to see is, that because there is Ugric Baltic culture in Estonia in 1066, it should also be in later scenarios. Normandy as Frankish is OK to me, as long rulers of England and Apulia are Norman at game start.
-
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.
I can't see why you'd want the rulers of France and Apulia to be Norman and the Norman provinces themselves to be Frankish. If the Normans in Normandie are Franks all the others should be aswell.
Again: The cultures are mostly important for naming nobles, and who would like the kings of England to be Bohemond, Roger, etc. instead of William (Gillaume), Henry (Henri) etc.
The english normans are perfectly suited right now.
Let discuss something else:
Claims, religious conversions, culture spread (that way, you could make a sicily norman england) and phoenix' excellent suggestions.
Esben
The english normans are perfectly suited right now.
Let discuss something else:
Claims, religious conversions, culture spread (that way, you could make a sicily norman england) and phoenix' excellent suggestions.
Esben
Damn good idea. Else we will soon be is so deep crap, when the people from Balkans learn that cultures are open for "discussion" again... :wacko:Veldmaarschalk said:
There is of course a plan B... MrT, put your Warning-gun on full-auto and ask for faster PM:ing (that one post per 30 seconds will else get us all killed).
Why can't we just add some of the french like names that were for english kings to the norman culture?? That way we get the good names for the english kings as well as normandy making sense...
MrT said:
Well, in the case of norman culture there is no possible spread at all, since there's no original province to spread from(which is a requirement AFAIK). Not a real problem since it's pretty easy to turn any given province norman in the save file, but still.
I think the problem, Cliffracer, is that the 'ideal' solution would be to split the 'Frankish' Normans from the Sicilian Normans since by this stage in history the two cultures were already sufficiently divergent and would become more so, particularly with naming, from 1066 onwards.
As far as I know, which isn't very far, Norman culture in Normandy became much like Breton culture in Brittany; not Frankish enough to cuddle up to the rulers of Paris, but having far more in common with Frankish culture than anything else. Norman French was still pretty much French, just as English was pretty much Saxon English. The ruling cultures of the provinces affected the language, but didn't rewrite it.
Given that as of 1100 the Normans and Saxons started to reconcile some of their differences, and then the cultures began blending into something that focused more on the emergent 'English' culture, its almost a moot point. The differences between Norman and Saxon survived more in terms of nobility vs peasantry, and that the noblemen spoke French as well as English.
The approach of having Normandy as Frankish is flawed, but as is having Essex as Saxon, if you're talking in terms of the culture of the kings. Or, indeed, for the culture of most of the nobility. I doubt many Norman noblemen randomly gave their sons Saxon names - and the Norman kings certainly wouldn't have done. In fact, they did the exact reverse with the wife of Henry I, Edith, who took a Norman name, Mathilda.
However, saying that anywhere in England was truly Norman or English culture in 1066 is bizarre and too forward-thinking, respectively. The current set-up works better in the long run than waiting for Normandy to wake up and become Frankish and stop being 'Norman' years after the last remnants of Norman culture in England have ceased to be meaningful.
As far as I know, which isn't very far, Norman culture in Normandy became much like Breton culture in Brittany; not Frankish enough to cuddle up to the rulers of Paris, but having far more in common with Frankish culture than anything else. Norman French was still pretty much French, just as English was pretty much Saxon English. The ruling cultures of the provinces affected the language, but didn't rewrite it.
Given that as of 1100 the Normans and Saxons started to reconcile some of their differences, and then the cultures began blending into something that focused more on the emergent 'English' culture, its almost a moot point. The differences between Norman and Saxon survived more in terms of nobility vs peasantry, and that the noblemen spoke French as well as English.
The approach of having Normandy as Frankish is flawed, but as is having Essex as Saxon, if you're talking in terms of the culture of the kings. Or, indeed, for the culture of most of the nobility. I doubt many Norman noblemen randomly gave their sons Saxon names - and the Norman kings certainly wouldn't have done. In fact, they did the exact reverse with the wife of Henry I, Edith, who took a Norman name, Mathilda.
However, saying that anywhere in England was truly Norman or English culture in 1066 is bizarre and too forward-thinking, respectively. The current set-up works better in the long run than waiting for Normandy to wake up and become Frankish and stop being 'Norman' years after the last remnants of Norman culture in England have ceased to be meaningful.
jordarkelf said:
And that is why half of Iberia should not be Arab. Arabs were never a majority in Iberia and were restricted to the aristocracy and ruling class. The people were majorly descendants of the previous VIsigoth and Iberian settlers. The most correct culture, as some people have already proposed in the past, would be Mozarab (Iberian).
In fact, even the "De Normandy" and "de Hauteville" and other Norman dynasties from normandy dynastie should start with frankish culture.
The northmens have from a long time adopted the french culture in normandy.
The northmens have from a long time adopted the french culture in normandy.
But we don't want king Guillaume of England or the heirs of Apulia being a long line of Louis de Hautevilles, so we make the distinction in game. 
I like the current setup. As it is the rulers of England/Normandy/Naples are all norman, but since there aren't any norman culture provinces, they are just the ruling class. As time goes on the rulers of Normandy will start becoming french, and that makes sense. Similarly for the Norman upper class in England and the Norman upper class in southern Italy also blending into with the locals.
Weren't the norman aristocracy more French than the commoners? I'd suspect this was the case, no the only case that has been put forward is a case for removing Norman culture completely.
oh yes! what if the red devils who dwell in that horrible place learn that it is open.. oh the horror.. 1st. simple logic tells that after 1.05 everything is up for discussion again and 2nd. Byakhiam have very well decided to solve the problem by the big thread he started to set up the cultures in.. the ba.. in the abyss for europeans
enough off topic
We can always make just 1 province in normandy with Norman culture (Eu?
) for pure gameplay reasons - so one can spread the norman culture if he wants.Err...good question about the Norman aristocracy. I'll be quite honest and say that I'm no expert on the Norman culture at all - however, I would expect the reverse of your statement to be correct.
The Normans were invaders and immigrants from somewhere further up the coast than France that settled in the region. I don't believe they were ever the majority culture in Normandy - if they ever were, it would be around 1066. I would assume that the situation there was much the same as in 1066 England, that the Normans were grossly overrepresented in the nobility when compared to the peasantry.
Putting it another way, before the Normans arrived in Normandy, the peasants must have been Frankish - it stands to reason. Unless the Norman occupation was culturally overwhelming or the immigration rate was astronomical, it is likely that the province still retained a high amount of Frankish culture.
This would show through in the language of the Normans becoming more like French than anything else (exactly the same would later happen to the Normans in England, but with Saxon English). The commoners may have lost touch with their Frankish roots by being so independent of the rest of France for so long that they, like the Bretons, saw themselves as a distinctly different cultural group - more Norman than French. Or, perhaps more accurately, 'not the same Frankish as Paris' rather than Norman per se.
There are parallels to this situation in England, with the melting pot. After a lengthy period of Norman rule and cultural fusion, the difference between nobility and peasant culture became less pronounced - but they certainly weren't either Norman or Saxon any more.
Speaking historically, Normandy would have been quite sheltered from the melting pot in England (just as it is in-game). It is highly unlikely that the Frankish-Normans would have become English in any way at all - however, their rulers in England would most definitely have become so. That kind of difference and the resulting feeling of alienation would probably have helped the Frankish-Normans see themselves as being closer to France than England - hence why then French-owned Normandy was never supportive of England in the HYW (IIRC).
Removing Norman culture completely would be a bit extreme. What would you then call William the Conqueror and co. - Frankish? Hardly. English? Again, not really. Even his unborn son Henry I, who really kicked off the whole melting pot, wasn't really 'English'.
Having Normandy as Frankish actually works surprisingly well. If it disturbs you in any way, its only a matter of moments to change it to Norman culture.
The Normans were invaders and immigrants from somewhere further up the coast than France that settled in the region. I don't believe they were ever the majority culture in Normandy - if they ever were, it would be around 1066. I would assume that the situation there was much the same as in 1066 England, that the Normans were grossly overrepresented in the nobility when compared to the peasantry.
Putting it another way, before the Normans arrived in Normandy, the peasants must have been Frankish - it stands to reason. Unless the Norman occupation was culturally overwhelming or the immigration rate was astronomical, it is likely that the province still retained a high amount of Frankish culture.
This would show through in the language of the Normans becoming more like French than anything else (exactly the same would later happen to the Normans in England, but with Saxon English). The commoners may have lost touch with their Frankish roots by being so independent of the rest of France for so long that they, like the Bretons, saw themselves as a distinctly different cultural group - more Norman than French. Or, perhaps more accurately, 'not the same Frankish as Paris' rather than Norman per se.
There are parallels to this situation in England, with the melting pot. After a lengthy period of Norman rule and cultural fusion, the difference between nobility and peasant culture became less pronounced - but they certainly weren't either Norman or Saxon any more.
Speaking historically, Normandy would have been quite sheltered from the melting pot in England (just as it is in-game). It is highly unlikely that the Frankish-Normans would have become English in any way at all - however, their rulers in England would most definitely have become so. That kind of difference and the resulting feeling of alienation would probably have helped the Frankish-Normans see themselves as being closer to France than England - hence why then French-owned Normandy was never supportive of England in the HYW (IIRC).
Removing Norman culture completely would be a bit extreme. What would you then call William the Conqueror and co. - Frankish? Hardly. English? Again, not really. Even his unborn son Henry I, who really kicked off the whole melting pot, wasn't really 'English'.
Having Normandy as Frankish actually works surprisingly well. If it disturbs you in any way, its only a matter of moments to change it to Norman culture.
Byakhiam said:But we don't want king Guillaume of England or the heirs of Apulia being a long line of Louis de Hautevilles, so we make the distinction in game.
Well, William is Guillaume so...
Esben
P.S: Normans originated from Denmark/Norway, so the aristocracy was decendants from nor(th)m(e)n. Simple is it not ? A noble from mostlikely Denmark named Rollo settled in normandy about 911, with accept from the frankish king.
Byakhiam said:But we don't want king Guillaume of England or the heirs of Apulia being a long line of Louis de Hautevilles, so we make the distinction in game.
why we don't ?