Wallachia/Moldova map suggestion + vlachs are NOT slavic

[Cod]

OK, I've noticed a small mistake here... In the game the vlachs belong to the south slavic culture group. It's incorrect because they are descending from the romanized population in the present-day territory of Romania and Moldova.
So they should belong to the latin culture group.
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vlachs


Also, the Dniester splits the Moldova region in two and it shouldn't...

Correcting this small error will improve historic & geographic accuracy

 

[omega20056]

The official response IIRC was that they work better in the Slavic group.

 

[TheDungen]

Speaking of the vlach I was just thinking that their push into wallachia proper (sometime between 876 and 1066) should be handled by an event.
As for culture I don't think bulgarian (at least back in those days) were slavic either. More like altaic (like the bohlgar) or something.
Perhaps the vlach could be in the Byzantine culture group? They aren't really a culture group as a group of cultures in the sphere of influence of the ERE. Which seems to apply to the vlach.

 

[Thure]

Again and again and again...

Culture =/= Language! Culturally the Vlachs in this era were closer to the South Slvas than to anything else... They have nothing in common with Italians. It wouldn't make sense to put them in the Latin culture group...

 

[starwarsfan541]

Again and again and again...

Culture =/= Language! Culturally the Vlachs in this era were closer to the South Slvas than to anything else... They have nothing in common with Italians. It wouldn't make sense to put them in the Latin culture group...

Thats oversimplifying it in my opinion, language is an intrinisic part in cultures and how they are different. For example I think Aramaen should be its own culture group.

As to the OP's statement, I need to research it more as I understand little. however I dislike cultures being lumped into something they wernt for gameplay reasons unless its extremely game breaking.

 

[Cod]

Speaking of the vlach I was just thinking that their push into wallachia proper (sometime between 876 and 1066) should be handled by an event.
As for culture I don't think bulgarian (at least back in those days) were slavic either. More like altaic (like the bohlgar) or something.
Perhaps the vlach could be in the Byzantine culture group? They aren't really a culture group as a group of cultures in the sphere of influence of the ERE. Which seems to apply to the vlach.

I think it's an alternative for them to be

Again and again and again...

Culture =/= Language! Culturally the Vlachs in this era were closer to the South Slvas than to anything else... They have nothing in common with Italians. It wouldn't make sense to put them in the Latin culture group...

I don't think they were very close to the south slavs since in many chronics they were reffered to as romans:
"Byzantine writer Kekaumenos, the author of the Strategikon (1078), described a Roman (Vlach) revolt in Northern Greece in 1066."
"In 1213, a joint army composed by Romans (Vlachs), Saxons and Pechenegs led by Ioachim from Sibiu, attacked the Bulgars and Cumans from Vidin. From this date, all battles of Hungarian kingdom in Carpathian area were supported by Romance people from Transylvania."

Also:
From the Germanic peoples, the term passed to the Slavs and from these in turn to other peoples, such as the Hungarians ("oláh", referring to Vlachs, more specifically Romanians, "olasz", referring to Italians) and Byzantines ("Βλάχοι", "Vláhi"), and was used for all Latin people of the Balkans. The Polish word for "Italian", Włoch (plural Włosi), has the same origin, as does the Slovenian, vaguely derogatory word "lach", also for Italians.

 

[Thure]

Thats oversimplifying it in my opinion, language is an intrinisic part in cultures and how they are different. For example I think Aramaen should be its own culture group.

As to the OP's statement, I need to research it more as I understand little. however I dislike cultures being lumped into something they wernt for gameplay reasons unless its extremely game breaking.

So have you any source that Vlachs had any connection to Italians? Really... I don't like it some people want to put cultures in one group only for linguistic reasons like 'Romanians spoke a Romance language!'

I don't think they were very close to the south slavs since in many chronics they were reffered to as romans:
"Byzantine writer Kekaumenos, the author of the Strategikon (1078), described a Roman (Vlach) revolt in Northern Greece in 1066."
"In 1213, a joint army composed by Romans (Vlachs), Saxons and Pechenegs led by Ioachim from Sibiu, attacked the Bulgars and Cumans from Vidin. From this date, all battles of Hungarian kingdom in Carpathian area were supported by Romance people from Transylvania."

Also:
From the Germanic peoples, the term passed to the Slavs and from these in turn to other peoples, such as the Hungarians ("oláh", referring to Vlachs, more specifically Romanians, "olasz", referring to Italians) and Byzantines ("Βλάχοι", "Vláhi"), and was used for all Latin people of the Balkans. The Polish word for "Italian", Włoch (plural Włosi), has the same origin, as does the Slovenian, vaguely derogatory word "lach", also for Italians.

This are not quotes from the chrinics. They were not called 'Romans' in the chonicles. Romans is just the translation your text use... And of course they spoke a Romance language... and? Beside of Lanmguage Romanians have nothing in Common with the Latin culture group...

 

[starwarsfan541]

So have you any source that Vlachs had any connection to Italians? Really... I don't like it some people want to put cultures in one group only for linguistic reasons like 'Romanians spoke a Romance language!'



This are not quotes from the chrinics. They were not called 'Romans' in the chonicles. Romans is just the translation your text use... And of course they spoke a Romance language... and? Beside of Lanmguage Romanians have nothing in Common with the Latin culture group...

And I said I dont know much about them and wanted more info, I really have no clue on the Vlachs I am just saying such things should be a factor.

 

[Thure]

And I said I dont know much about them and wanted more info, I really have no clue on the Vlachs I am just saying such things should be a factor.

And my point was just that too many people take it simple and say 'Language group = culture group'. Yes, language is a part of culture. But languages are only a part of culture. And we can't use modern Romanians as exemple for medieval Vlachs. After the 18th century the Romanian nation westernised itself, especially with strong connections too France.

And actually the Byzantine Empire called itself also 'Roman' but this don't mean they should be Latin culture group.

Vlachs in this era were mostly nomadic shepards. And politically they were very close connected with the Slavic rulers in this region, especially the Bulgarians. I don't think Vlachs would prefer an italian ruler over a Bulgarian one.

 

[theKing1988]

Penalizing the Vlachs in their relationship with their South Slavic neighbours would be a death sentence to the culture on a province level in 9½ out of 10 games.

And it would be more than a little silly to give them a close relationship with the in-game Italian cultures, which is basically what the the culture groups does, whom they had had zero close ties with since the fall of the Western Empire while moving them away from their South Slavic neighbours whom they had strong religious and political ties with and who helped shape Romanian identity for centuries. I'm especially thinking of the Bulgarians here. It wasn't just a coincidence that the Vlachs played such a big role in shaping Bulgarian politics of the Middle Ages and vice versa (Had it not been for Vlach support after the initial setbacks in the Asen rebellion, there would never have been a Second Bulgarian Empire for example)

So no, Vlachs are not Slavs. But they had pretty damn close relationships with the Slavs, that the game is incapable of portraying with other tools than the Culture Groups at the moment.

 

[starwarsfan541]

And my point was just that too many people take it simple and say 'Language group = culture group'. Yes, language is a part of culture. But languages are only a part of culture. And we can't use modern Romanians as exemple for medieval Vlachs. After the 18th century the Romanian nation westernised itself, especially with strong connections too France.

And actually the Byzantine Empire called itself also 'Roman' but this don't mean they should be Latin culture group.

Vlachs in this era were mostly nomadic shepards. And politically they were very close connected with the Slavic rulers in this region, especially the Bulgarians. I don't think Vlachs would prefer an italian ruler over a Bulgarian one.

I agree, though I also think Bulgarian being classified slavic in that period is wrong as well and its religion as tengri

 

[TheDungen]

Thats oversimplifying it in my opinion, language is an intrinisic part in cultures and how they are different. For example I think Aramaen should be its own culture group.

As to the OP's statement, I need to research it more as I understand little. however I dislike cultures being lumped into something they wernt for gameplay reasons unless its extremely game breaking.

Well they could call it something other than south slavic. Balkanese cultures? Honestly the Hungarian should probably go in the same culture group as these for gameplay reasons. Though yes I know neither Romania nor Hungary is really on the balkans.

 

[starwarsfan541]

Well they could call it something other than south slavic. Balkanese cultures? Honestly the Hungarian should probably go in the same culture group as these for gameplay reasons. Though yes I know neither Romania nor Hungary is really on the balkans.

Yea, those few cultures really are neither not sure what to call them as I have been thinking about it for my mod.

 

[Cod]

Well they could call it something other than south slavic. Balkanese cultures? Honestly the Hungarian should probably go in the same culture group as these for gameplay reasons. Though yes I know neither Romania nor Hungary is really on the balkans.

Well, a part of Romania is in the Balkans: Dobrogea region, of course it's not much but, still.

So have you any source that Vlachs had any connection to Italians? Really... I don't like it some people want to put cultures in one group only for linguistic reasons like 'Romanians spoke a Romance language!'



This are not quotes from the chrinics. They were not called 'Romans' in the chonicles. Romans is just the translation your text use... And of course they spoke a Romance language... and? Beside of Lanmguage Romanians have nothing in Common with the Latin culture group...

Yes, they were called romans in those writings, I didn't modify/translate anything, I just highlated the words, go read the link I gaved before posting such comments. Also, they were de descendents of the romans from Dacia... meaning they are latin, doesn't matter if they had connections to italians or not, also the latins are not only italians.

So no, Vlachs are not Slavs. But they had pretty damn close relationships with the Slavs, that the game is incapable of portraying with other tools than the Culture Groups at the moment.

Just because they had close relationships with their slav neighbors doesn't mean they should be in a culture group that they don't belong to. They had little relationship with the other latins because they were cut off, they were surrounded by slavs, magyars(after the conquest of Transylvania) or atlaics, which made them preserve their culture.

 

[Thure]

Yes, they were called romans in those writings, I didn't modify/translate anything, I just highlated the words, go read the link I gaved before posting such comments. Also, they were de descendents of the romans from Dacia... meaning they are latin, doesn't matter if they had connections to italians or not, also the latins are not only italians.

Ingame the Latins are Italians, French and Normans... and noone of them was culturally close to Romanians/Vlachs in this era.

And they are NOT called Romans in this writings... They are called Romans in your wikipedia links... Wikipedia calls them Romans not this writings. A Byzantine Chronicle would never wrote about a 'Roman revolt' because 'Roman' in Byzantine context means 'Byzantine'. He did use 'Vlach' in his chonicle. And as I said... yes they were Romance... but this had nothing to do with their culture. Just because they spoke a Latin langtuage don't mean they are close to Italians or French culturally.

Just because they had close relationships with their slav neighbors doesn't mean they should be in a culture group that they don't belong to. They had little relationship with the other latins because they were cut off, they were surrounded by slavs, magyars(after the conquest of Transylvania) or atlaics, which made them preserve their culture.

Exactly this is the reason why they should be in the same group as the Slavs in this area... Otherwise they would prefer Italian rulers over Bulgarian ones. Which makes no sense at all. Culture is more than just language.

Beside their language they had nothing in Common with Italians or Frenchmen.

 

[theKing1988]

Well, a part of Romania is in the Balkans: Dobrogea region, of course it's not much but, still.

Yes, they were called romans in those writings, I didn't modify/translate anything, I just highlated the words, go read the link I gaved before posting such comments. Also, they were de descendents of the romans from Dacia... meaning they are latin, doesn't matter if they had connections to italians or not, also the latins are not only italians.



Just because they had close relationships with their slav neighbors doesn't mean they should be in a culture group that they don't belong to. They had little relationship with the other latins because they were cut off, they were surrounded by slavs, magyars(after the conquest of Transylvania) or atlaics, which made them preserve their culture.

The Culture groups are not all about culture as Thure so accurately points out.

It is also a tool that is used to portray close cross-cultural political relationships that the game is incapable of portraying otherwise.

Which is also why the Basque are in the same culture group as the Iberians and not in their own culture group and why the Georgians and the Armenians are in the same culture group as the Greeks and not in a Caucasian culture group together instead.

 

[Cod]

Alright so it's a game mechanic... fine.
But now the map... what do you guys think about this? The D'niepr should be moved more to the east, between Peresechen and Olvia.

 

[theKing1988]

The map of Wallachia, Transylvania and Moldavia is so horrible that i don't even think that moving the river is enough.

If they start working on fixing it, i would prefer if they looked at the size and position of provinces, mountains, rivers, basically everything.

 

[TheDungen]

And they are NOT called Romans in this writings... They are called Romans in your wikipedia links... Wikipedia calls them Romans not this writings. A Byzantine Chronicle would never wrote about a 'Roman revolt' because 'Roman' in Byzantine context means 'Byzantine'. He did use 'Vlach' in his chonicle..

Do you have a soruce dor him using vlach? Romans have often revolted against romans, also remember that the byzantine emprie considered itself rome but the majority of the people were greek and spoke greek. It's not so far from mind that they may have a term for those who still clung to the latin heritage of the empire.

 

[Thure]

Alright so it's a game mechanic... fine.
But now the map... what do you guys think about this? The D'niepr should be moved more to the east, between Peresechen and Olvia.

No... it's not only game mechanics. Partly too. But Vlachs in this era were closer to Slavic Bulgarians than to Frenchmen or Italians. Maybe the term of this group as 'Slavic' isn't right. But it's accurate to put Vlachs in the same group as Serbians or Bulgarians.

And yes... the map has many errors... sadly.

Do you have a soruce dor him using vlach? Romans have often revolted against romans, also remember that the byzantine emprie considered itself rome but the majority of the people were greek and spoke greek. It's not so far from mind that they may have a term for those who still clung to the latin heritage of the empire.

They had a term... Vlach. Vlach was the Byzantine term for the Latins on the Balkan. If Byzantines use 'Roman' they mean their own people.