• 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.

Tinto Maps #1 - 10th of May 2024 - Low Countries

Hello everybody, and welcome to the first post of Tinto Maps! This is a new weekly series that we will be running about the top-secret game Project Caesar.

Let me introduce myself before I continue, as some of you may get to know me from the development of the latest EUIV DLCs, but I might not be as well-known to everyone as Johan. I’m Pavía, the Content Design Lead at Paradox Tinto, which I joined in 2021. Before becoming a videogame developer, my background was as a Historian, which led me to work on a PhD. in Medieval History (fool me!), which I finished in 2020. Besides that, I’ve spent several thousands of hours of my life playing Paradox GSGs since I discovered and started playing Europa Universalis 20 years ago, in 2004.

What this new series will be about is quite straightforward: each week I will be sharing with you maps of a new different region, so you have an outlook of them and we are able to receive early feedback (because as you may already know from Johan’s Tinto Talks, there is still a lot of WIP stuff ongoing).

About this feedback, we’d like you to take into account a couple of things. The first is that we’ve worked really hard to gather the best sources of information available to craft the best possible map; we used GIS tools with several layers of historical map sources from academic works, geographical data, administrative data, etc., to help us ensure the desired quality. So we would appreciate getting specific suggestions backed by these types of sources, as others (let’s say, a Wikipedia map or YouTube video with no references) may not be reliable enough. The second thing to comment on is that sometimes a certain decision we made was an interpretation over an unclear source, while sometimes we have just plainly made some errors when crafting the map (which on a 30,000 location map is a normal thing, I guess). I’ll let you know when any of these happen, and I’m also going to ask for your understanding when an error or bug is found and confirmed as such.

With those forewords said, let’s start with today’s region: the Low Countries! This is what the political map looks like:

Countries.png

The regional situation in 1337. The counties of Hainaut, Holland, and Zeeland are ruled by William of Avesnes, who is married to Joanna, daughter of Duke John III of Brabant. Another John, the Duke of Luxembourg, might be the strongest power, as he is also the King of Bohemia. The County of Flanders is the wealthiest country in the region, controlling such important cities as Brugge and Ghent. Up in the north, we have other interesting countries, such as the Bishopric of Utrecht or the Republic of Frisia (you might notice that we're using a dynamic custom country name for them, 'Frisian Freedom').

And here we have the locations:

Locations.png

We had a fun bug for some time - Antwerpen didn’t have any pixels connected to the sea, which we found because we couldn’t build any type of port building there. There’s a happy ending, as the bug has already been corrected, and Antwerpen can finally have a proper port!

Provinces:

Provinces.jpg


Terrain (Climate, Topography, and Vegetation):

Climate.jpg

Topography.jpg

Vegetation.jpg

We are aware that the Netherlands looked differently in the 14th century, as several land reclamations took place during the Late Medieval and Early Modern periods, but we are using a 20th-century version of the map for the sake of consistency. Most of the regions throughout the world would look quite different from nowadays, and documenting those changes (especially the coastline shapes) would be a non-trivial problem to resolve. As a side note, we already removed Flevoland from it, and have already identified some other modern ones that slipped through and we'll eventually remove them, as well.

Cultures:

Cultures.png

The stripes mean that there are pops of different culture inhabiting in those location. Also, the German and French cultures are WIP, we’ll show you a proper version on later Tinto Maps.

Religions:

Religions.png

Not many religions here yet, although there will be interesting religious stuff happening eventually…

Raw Goods:

Goods.png

Goods get regularly swapped around here and there to have a balance between geographical and historical accuracy, and gameplay purposes. So take this as the far-from-final current version of them.

And an additional map for this week:

Markets.png

We reinstated a Low Countries market centered on Antwerpen, after doing some balance tweaks that made it more viable.

And these are the maps for today! I hope that you have a nice weekend, and next Friday, we will travel down south, to Iberia!
 

Attachments

  • Climate.jpg
    Climate.jpg
    357,1 KB · Views: 0
  • Topography.jpg
    Topography.jpg
    402,8 KB · Views: 0
  • Vegetation.jpg
    Vegetation.jpg
    414,6 KB · Views: 0
Last edited:
  • 338Love
  • 129Like
  • 6
  • 3
  • 1Haha
  • 1
Reactions:
The naming conventions are quite confusing. For example it's Köln on the locations map, but Cologne on the political map. On the other hand it's Moers on the political map (shortened to Moe.) but Mors on the locations. What exactly is the system here?

This is propably a non trivial problem, as both spelling as pronunciation of several locations has shifted within Project Ceasar's timeframe and was certainly not codified in the 14. century. Also: Which language do you actually use? Luxembourg for example is Luxembourg in French and English, Luxemburg in German and Lëtzebuerg in Luxembourgish. Now one could argue that it should be Luxemburg because Luxembourgish was a German dialect, but so was Dutch at the time.


Anyway, the German speaking locations are missing a couple umlaute:
  • Prüm
  • Düren
  • Hunsrück
  • Möchengladback
  • Rüdesheim

Secondly the Province map (besides being difficult to read) was surprising - the term Gau for a german province came out of fashion in the carolingian era and would not become popular again until the nazis reanimated it - which it is associated with today. Please, please rename.

Third: Pearls in the Netherlands?
 
Last edited:
  • 3
  • 2Like
Reactions:
Culture there was never Flemish, the linguistic frontier didn't move to much around those places.
I know that that's what's being taught in French schools about the city of Lille, but:
- did it also apply to the countryside around the city?
- did it also apply to Tournai/Doornik, Douai/Dowaai and their countrysides?
- is it actually accurate this early, or just the French being French for the centuries since?
 
Secondly the Province map (besides being difficult to read) was surprising - the term Gau for a german province came out of fashion in the carolingian era and would not become popular again until the nazis reanimated it - which it is associated with today. Please, please rename.
Eh, -gau is still in use for many regions today in southern Germany. These are just traditional names and nobody here would associate them with the Nazis.

But I do agree that the provinces in Germany look anachronistic. We will have to wait for the German Tinto Maps...
 
3. Opting for an intermediate level, grouping Flemish, Brabantic, and Limburgic under Flemish, and Hollandic and Dutch Low Saxon groups under Dutch (as they also had a really close relationship). This is the one we decided to go to, for the moment.
Is it acceptable to have Dutch Low Saxon groups integrated into German Low Saxon? Considering that compared to its similarity with Dutch, its Low Saxon feature is more out standing, and the ambigious border of Dutch and Low Saxon could be presented (instead of a sharp one between them)?
 
Brabantic and Limburgic are distinct enough to warrant their own inclusion I’d say. Since the map is so granular in provinces, it makes sense to have the same granularity in terms of culture.
I agree, but supposing the bit of German culture map visible, it would probably make those four cultures too small.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
  • 1
Reactions:
Keep the cultures like this! Recognizing that Flanders is really wealthy at this period is what I am very happy for, being Flemish myself. Our little region at this time was very important indeed. Keep the Flemish and Dutch cultures separate! I know you wont go 100% historical and too in depth with the game, but keep the Flemish primitives in mind! It's basically a whole other branch of the renaissance and had a lot of impact on the region/influx of trade/wealth. Looks amazing !
As a (West) Fleming myself, I very much disagree with the current setup. It perpetuates the idea that the current North-South cultural division in the (historical) Netherlands was already there in the Middle Ages, whereas it is actually the consequence of the post 80 Years War partition of a region that from the 14th to the 16th centuries were increasingly being treated and seen as a single structure (with Flanders, Brabant and Holland as the core), into an independent, Northern, Protestant dominated half and a Habsburg controlled, Southern, Catholic half.

For a historically accurate 1300s setup, you either go for (1) a culture covering the entire area where Low Frankish languages were spoken, so from Flanders to Holland to Limburg to Gelderland (West Low Saxon can maybe be included, but as a Fleming I'm less knowlegdeable about that), or (2) split the culture into the main dialect areas: Flemish (Flanders + culturally split locations of Saint-Omer, Calais and Boulogne, and Zeeland), Brabantian (Brabant + Gelre + Cleves, Venlo, Cuijk), Hollandic (Holland, Utrecht + culturally split Zeeland) and Limburgish (Loon, Maastricht, Weert, Roermond, [+ maybe Mönchengladbach, Neuss]).

Keep in mind that while Brugge was also one of the biggest trade monsters, the population also was. Brugge was one of the most populous areas in EUROPE around this time OR at least starting to climb, same with Gent. Population should be higher than Milan/Venice but still well under Paris, but still the 2nd most populous area at the start.
When I'm looking through academic works on European Middle Ages and Modern Era population sizes, I get a very different impression. For Bruges, the population is estimated to have been around 40,000 inhabitants throughout the 1300s, with a high point of around 60,000 in the late 1200s (W. Prevenier; J. Dumolyn), whereas Venice and Milan were estimated to have been around 100,000 in that period, with the latter reaching 150,000 in the 1300s (P. Malanima).

This doesn't take away the fact that Bruges and Ghent were the largest cities in their home region and also in Europe north of the Alps (save for Paris), which is impressive for two cities that are so close together, but Italian city sizes were on a whole different level in the 1300s.
 
Last edited:
  • 6Like
Reactions:
Culture there was never Flemish, the linguistic frontier didn't move to much around those places.
Culture and language are not always the same thing. As an anecdote, during the Franco-Flemish War of 1297-1305, the inhabitants of Douai, which was in the far south of the County of Flanders where people spoke Picard, reportedly shouted: "Tos Flamens, tos Flamens estons! Par Dieu, Fouquart, por nient en parleis, car tos summes et serons Flamens!" ("We are all Flemish, Fouqaert, by God, no matter the langauge we speak, we are and will be Flemish"), when the French king wanted to annex the County of Flanders to his crown domain.
I know that that's what's being taught in French schools about the city of Lille, but:
- did it also apply to the countryside around the city?
- did it also apply to Tournai/Doornik, Douai/Dowaai and their countrysides?
- is it actually accurate this early, or just the French being French for the centuries since?
If we look at the toponymy of the region around Lille and Tournai, there are only a few places with names of Germanic origin, which indicates that the Franks didn't settle as extensively there during the Migration Period. The area north of the Étaples-Béthune line did see extensive Frankish settlement, as can be derived from the numerous toponyms of Germanic origin + older names that underwent Germanic sound shifts there, and the francization of that area was still an ongoing process during the 14th and 15th centuries.
 
Last edited:
  • 1
Reactions:
I appreciate the detail that went into the map and that it is much more accurate then it was. I do however have alot of suggestions.

1. Utrecht and Zeeland were neither historically nor culturally North Hollandic or South Hollandic respectively. They should be separate provinces or part of a greater Holland province including both North and South Holland.

2. This leads to my next suggestion. North and South Holland weren’t really a thing. They were one united region. What can however be done is to separate West Frisia.

3. Flemish was just the culture and dialect of the region of Flanders which was subsumed in the larger dutch culture. The flemish-dutch distinction is something that slowly grew as an idea under a long period of spanish and austrian rule en then separation after the belgian revolution.

4. Dutch language and culture was present in modern day german borders. The regions of Tecklenburg, Cleves, Bentheim and some cities and regions in between were all dutch (atleast to a great extent). With Cleves I don’t just mean the small province you assigned but actually a much larger area that even went all the way to Düsseldorf. The Calais area in France was also dutch. You also didn’t add the modern german and modern french parts of historical Luxemburg to luxemburgish culture.

5. You should change the map you use from a 20th century one to a early 19th century or 16th century map. Then you have a map that is actually relevant to the time period (eithet in the middle or one of the end) You don’t have to keep changing it but a 20th century map seems like a less accurate choice.

6. I don’t know how you organized cultures but if possible I would suggest that you create a dutch culture group which is either an intermediate group which is part of a greater germanic group or which is separate. It could be valid to just keep lowland cultures under the german group but then The following wouldn’t be possible: create all the different regional dutch cultures and group them under a dutch/lowland culture group. I would say Frisian, Hollandic, Gelrean/Nederlandish/Low Saxon(/dutch), Limburgish, Brabantian and Flemish. Potentially you could add Walloon, Luxemurgish and Picard culture because historically and culturally they were very integrated together. You could also, but I would not recommend, splitting Clevean from Gelrean/Nederlandish/Low Saxon.

7. I would suggest that the resources get an update as holland consisting of fish and pearls seems a bit weird. But I can’t say how I would do it. Also the geography is a bit bland in the Northern Netherlands. It should have some more farmland I would think and some one or two forest tiles in the east and maybe one or two hill tiles in Limburg should be slightly more accurate and alot more interesting. One mountain tile in the eastern ardennes could be interesting and semi-accurate. But it would be stretching it maybe.

8. Although it is impossible it would have been preferable that the locations were named after regions instead of named after cities because then regions such as the Betuwe and Veluwe etc could be named. Another probably impossible suggestion is that provinces should be consolidated instead of split up because of modern borders and regions. Luxemburg, Flanders, Holland and Limburg. can in my opinion all be consolidated. Maybe even Frisia, Wallonia and Brabant. This however is all dependant on the possibility to conquer individual locations and not just entire provinces. I would also like to see places like Delft and Haarlem which were very important historically and even today.

9. I am interested if the Antwerpen market can eventually change in name to the Amsterdam market. Historically the Antwerpen port was eventually overtaken by Amsterdam after the decline of that port and the rise of the Northern city. It would be interesting to see that happen. Maybe an event could be created to accompany it. But this is all not necessary.

10. In the north east you have some islands and regions that were Frisian. You could create a separate culture called North Frisian or subsume it under Frisian or just ignore it. But I wanted to atleast mention it.

I am happy to see the improvements. I hope these suggestions can help.
 
  • 3Like
Reactions:
Eh, -gau is still in use for many regions today in southern Germany. These are just traditional names and nobody here would associate them with the Nazis.

But I do agree that the provinces in Germany look anachronistic. We will have to wait for the German Tinto Maps...
-Gau has stayed as a region/place name but it is the exception, not the rule. Breisgau or Oberammergau come to mind. But mostly - and especially in the region depicted it's an anachronism. Ammergau (The one just next to East Friesland - not the one where Oberammergau is) for example would be Ammerland. Lochtropgau is propably the worst offender. It's named after Lochtrop, which is a completely unremarkable village which in 1543 had a total of three taxpayers.:
It should rether be called Mark.
 
9. I am interested if the Antwerpen market can eventually change in name to the Amsterdam market. Historically the Antwerpen port was eventually overtaken by Amsterdam after the decline of that port and the rise of the Northern city. It would be interesting to see that happen. Maybe an event could be created to accompany it. But this is all not necessary.
This is not how markets work in Project Caesar. Markets are just a single town/city which captures surrounding locations into its market depending on its influence.
So in this starting setup shown, there is a market center in Antwerp, and you would need to create a new market center in Amsterdam and have it completely outcompete Antwerp to change that.

-Gau has stayed as a region/place name but it is the exception, not the rule. Breisgau or Oberammergau come to mind. But mostly - and especially in the region depicted it's an anachronism. Ammergau (The one just next to East Friesland - not the one where Oberammergau is) for example would be Ammerland.
Like I said, we have lots of Gau regions in Southern Germany, so I would not call that an exception - it's just a regional difference.
And yes, it's absolutely anachronistic to have these 11th or 12th century divisions present in the 14th century and beyond.
 
The question is east of Bethune. The fact that most cities' Germanic names are today little known/used doesn't mean they aren't there. Even all the way in Arras derives from Germanic Atrecht.
 
Brabantic and Limburgic are distinct enough to warrant their own inclusion I’d say. Since the map is so granular in provinces, it makes sense to have the same granularity in terms of culture. Now it seems that Flanders and the Netherlands were homogeneous, while there were strong regional identities (especially after the Northern provinces adopted Calvinism) that became more unified (read: suppressed by Hollandic) later by patriotism and nationalism.

It would promote regionalism, instead of a united Netherlands as a logical outcome, as that really only happened as a result of a common plight against the Habsburgs and their oppression of the Protestants.

Some people want to combine Dutch and Flemish, and some people want to split these groups even further. I think for Europe it'd make sense to have 3 culture levels, local, regional, union. And have local groups maybe be part of more than one regional group.
 
  • 2Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Like I said, we have lots of Gau regions in Southern Germany, so I would not call that an exception - it's just a regional difference.
And yes, it's absolutely anachronistic to have these 11th or 12th century divisions present in the 14th century and beyond.
Indeed, as I wrote several pages ago, in Southern Germany (+Austria and Switzerland) many -gau names are very much part of regional tradition and still used today.
North of the Weißwurstäquator they are anachronistic and have a weird 1930s vibe.
I think I understand why Tinto used them - these names do appear in maps of early medieval Germany and they were probably looking for "neutral" names that did not refer to the principalities existing within the territories.
Besides being anachronistic, the Gaue referred to much smaller territories than the provinces they cover in the PC map. To name a particularly glaring example, the city of Trier would be in the "Bliesgau" province. The actual Bliesgau is a small strip of land in the Pfälzerwald southeast of Saarbrücken.
I don't have a suggestion for a better base for province names, but I do not like this one for a game starting in the 14th century.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
What is the policy for the language of naming the provinces?
I see a mix between english & dutch & french names for provinces.
If the name is localised according to ruling/province culture, then Ostende, Ghent, Cassel & Dunkirk should be renamed to: Oostende, Gent, Kassel & Duinkerke.

If not provinces like Antwerpen should be renamed to Antwerp I guess. Obviously I'm a fan of using the localised name according to ruling culture / location culture (language).

The best would be an option that let's you switch between all 3: "Everything in english", "localised by majority culture (language) in location, localised by ruler culture (language).

Edit: Bruges should then be Brugge aswell.

Edit nr2 : Same goes for province names: you have Zuid & Noord holland but West & East Flanders. Consitency :) , it should be West Vlaanderen & Oost Vlaanderen & Zuid Brabant.
 
Last edited:
  • 1Like
Reactions:
The question is east of Bethune. The fact that most cities' Germanic names are today little known/used doesn't mean they aren't there. Even all the way in Arras derives from Germanic Atrecht.
Arras is not derived from Atrecht, but from the Latin Atrebatum, named after the Celtic Atrebeti tribe that lived in the area. The fact that Arras was historically known as Atrecht in Dutch, is due to sound shifts and maybe a confusion with -tricht suffix used in West Germanic, meaning 'bridge across', like Utrecht, Maastricht or Berendrecht.

Once a place is permanently settled, toponyms rarely change drastically (even when, for example, Louis XI depopulated Arras by force and renamed it 'Franchise' in 1477-79, the new name still didn't stick) and are normally adapted to the pronunciation of the new dominant language or a neighbouring language, or to sound shifts happening within the language. There's no reason to believe that most of the villages around Lille or Tournai were so extensively depopulated after the 1337 start date that they were repopulated by francophones.

Some sources on Flemish toponyms in Northern France (in Dutch): Ryckeboer, 1997; Gysseling, 1972
 
Seems like there is a typo in "Kemptenland" , I think it should be "Kempenland" , I can't find any sources that have it with a "t".
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Another question, will be possible to DISABLE all animations on map for players with bad pc? I never needed moving water, or soldiers looking sideways. What I mean, I think many graphic options would be nice to decrease standard PDX GST lags (late game mostly).
 
  • 3Like
Reactions:
The sheet's numbers are sometimes a bit higher than what I've seen in German sources, but yes, Köln had a population of ~40000 from the 13th century and stayed around that number for basically the whole game.
Also we know that that number was in an area of 401ha. Modern Köln is 40517ha which looks like it's slightly smaller than the location in the map shown.

So the location would have had additional population living outside the city as well. This is going to be a major problem if you use this sheet as reference, since there basically are no locations that are only limited to the historical area of the city.
I know, my point was basically that the location should have a population of at absolute minimum about 40,000. It doesn't make sense for it to be 20,000
 
  • 1
Reactions: