Tinto Maps #11 - 19th of July 2024 - Scandinavia

[Danskjävel]

I don't necessarily think they should be merged, I think they should be renamed and the borders redrawn, as both areas can easily be formed into Jellingsyssel and Løversyssel, with Vejle and Horsens being the main towns in these areas(and Silkeborg integrated into the Aarhus location)

Both Vejle and Horsens were market towns in the era, and it would represent better that the main area of population in Jutland is and has always been along the East Coast, where the soil is better for farming.

Also today, Horsens, Kolding and Vejle are neck on neck with each other in size, being the 7th, 8th and 9th largest towns in the country, all of them having between 61K and 63K inhabitants.

I was refering to another users comment, specifying Bølling, Grindsted and Silkeborg as potential candidates for merging into other locations. If so needed for increasing locations elsewhere.

Nis Baggesen said:
Others have already commented on the Danish locations, and I'll just quickly concur with the observations that Bølling, Grindsted and Silkeborg make little sense for the era, and could probably be collapsed into neighboring locations. At the very least Ringkøbing should be at Ringkøbing Fjord, where you have placed Bølling.

I think it's fair to say that they were less important, at least until the modern period, than Nyborg, Svendborg, Slagelse, Vordingborg, København and (Nykøbing) Falster

 

[Sulphurologist]

Part 1 - Topography
I'm back with another topographic analysis!
Before I dive in, first some comments and clarifications:

It's mostly flatland.. I went by the rule that if the peaks are less than 500 meters it's flatland, and you need to have over 1,000 meters and rather uneven to be a mountain. Norway is interesting there.. We do have a lot of impassable areas in Norway, making this one of the most fun parts to play in.

It does highlight a problem with a "systematic" approach to topography and trying to use average elevation above sea level as basis for hills and mountains because it doesn't really care about local variation in elevation and unique landforms. It takes away flavour if the locally important and famous hills of some random location are ommitted because they only reach up to 499 m or something, in which case there is just more to lose than gain. Unfortunately the best way to combat this is really just in-depth research into each country's topography (or even checking out the entries in a Wikipedia article like "List of hills/mountain ranges in [country]" could be sufficient sometimes)

The rule for 'less than 500 metres' is great for distinguishing flatlands from plateaus, but with that reasoning I feel you unjustly classified some relatively flat, but elevated terrain as hills. This is something @ArVass already mentioned, but as you might have noticed over the past few weeks, the Terrain Ruggedness Index is a measure that circumvents this problem, and you can view that result down below in the image mosaic. I therefore suggest a whole slew of plateau locations instead of hills along the southern Edge of the Scandes. I'd also suggest 'plateaus' for locations that have lots of 'rolling' hills or are densely dotted with small hills, as 'flatlands' feels too forgiving and 'hills' too strict for those places.

On Marshes and Lakes: Both @Daniel the Finlander and @ArVass have made an already extensive post on what should or should not be marshes, to which I agree and wish to expand upon. @ArVass already presented a peatlands map for Finland (original paper here). Luckily, a 2022 research made a global machine learning model for peatlands, called Peat-ML (how original), which allows us to extend this criterium to the entire Nordics. GIS-file can be downloaded here (CRS is 4326 - wgs84).
Of course, it wouldn't be nice of me to share this map without you knowing how it looks like, so you can see it in my image mosaic down below.

In my opinion, the Finnish lakes are so numerous and densely clustered, that they should be considered marshes/wetlands for gameplay purposes. Even though there are plenty of dry corridors in between, I'm sure this territory is not easy to navigate for an unfamiliar army or individual and habitation here is more difficult because of it.

Spoiler: Summary of Daniel and Arvass' comments

Okay I have a lot to say here, but I’ll start with something I already said before. Add more lakes! Hearts of Iron 4’s map has more lakes in Finland than this one does.

I will be back with more excessive nitpicking. Damn you Johan for posting so early! But thank you as well. Also this tinto maps should’ve been called ”Nordics”, not Scandinavia! Finland is not never has been and never will be Scandinavia.

		Also, you could afford to make Lapland even more hilly, see how much 500+ meter altitude terrain there is.	Third of all, more wetlands! (As i suggested in another thread, you should rename marsh terrain to wetland for a more broad and accurate definition).	Here’s a map with colors showing the natural states of swamps in the modern day, with red being drained and such, green being natural and mostly untouched and white being non-swamps: All this green is swamp! And its a modern map, there used to be even more. Its called SUOmi for a reason!	Same probably applies for Sweden/Karelia too btw.
View attachment 1165234	View attachment 1165240	View attachment 1165235	View attachment 1165236	View attachment 1165238	View attachment 1165239

View attachment 1165717
I did find a map of Finland's present peatlands and past, drained ones, though it 1. doesn't include non-peaty wetlands such as well-oxygenated swamps and marshes where peat doesn't form and 2. there are barely any NOT wetlands so it is probably an overshoot

Current Tinto design	TRI classification to identify topographic features objectively	Linear DEM	DEM with color scheme to visualise lower topographic features	Peat-ML map for Scandinavia: the brighter the higher the proportion of peatlands	My suggested changes based on these aforementioned sources

W-Norway:
- the topography near the coast around Sirudal is rather rugged. I'd extend the hills right up to the coast for Jaeren, Flekkefjord and Lindesnes, or perhaps a plateau here or there. Ortedal is elevated, but largely flat so I'd designate that as a plateau.
- Nidaros and Skaun are relatively flat, but too rugged to be considered flatlands. Plateau is an excellent alternative due to large parts of those locations exceeding 500m in height.

Central Scandinavia:
Along the Norwegian-Swedish border I'd classify a whole range of plateau provinces, that either are elevated above 500 metres, but not terribly rugged, or are below 500 metres, but are too rugged to be considered flatlands. Nordmark, Trøgstad, Kongsvinger, Glommadal, Elverum, Malung, Floda, Leksand, Stora Tuna, Falun, orsa, Sveg, Berg, Ragunda - Stensele, Sorsele, Arjeplog, Jokkmokk, Porjus
Northern Scandinavia:
Kautikeino and Karasjok are rather flat and should be plateaus. Enare is 50-50 hills and wetlands, but sees the start of the East-West hill/mountain range into the Kola peninsula. Ivalo has some significant slopes, so should also be hills. I'd advise against Enare being wetlands, considering the locations to the south (Enontakis, Nunnanen, Kittilä, Sodankylä, Kemijärvi and perhaps Hienatiemi are peatlands/densely 'laked' and are to be considered marshes. Prirechnyi is one of the flattest parts of the region, so definitely flatlands.
Lekanstroj Lekanstroj has some pretty impressive peaks and valleys, with more peaks than the neighboring Mafelskoj, so should be mountains, but not quite enough to be mountains for the whole location.
Candalax has several peaks, so should absolutely be hills.

Finland peatlands as marshes:
Considering note very province should be marshes for gameplay reasons too, I'd consider following peatlands to be marshes:
Ranua, Kuivaniemi, Pudasjiarvi, Paltamo, Utajärvi, Sikkalatva, Kajana, Kaustby, Lappo, Sastmola.
Kolan peatlands are: Kodova, keret, Voigoma, Kem, Tunga (and maybe Rugosenkoj)
Finland lakes as marshes:
Considering the sheer lake density, I'd suggest these locations to be marshesL
Sastamala, Forssa, Tammerfors, Jämsä, Lahti, Itis, Jyväskylä, Saarijärvi, Laukas, Kupio, Juroinen, Savonranta, Joroinen, Olofsborg, Riistina, Villmanstrand, Ketholm, Toksovo.

Southern Sweden should maybe have marshes:
- peatlands: Trollaborg
- dense lakes: Kinda, Oppunda, Gillberg, Vedbo, Åmål
Denmark has several peat bogs and coastal marshes dotted everywhere.
Thisted, Hjørring, Ribe and Kalundberg at the least should be marshes, with the potential addition of Varde and Husum.

 

[Bastiram]

Since I know that you sometimes take feedback on these posts I thought I would mention a few things in regard to Denmark. Even if I am about to gut my home of Silkeborg in the progress.

To make my arguments I am going to use two pictures
https://jggj.dk/thesis.htm

It shows the parish sizes in medieval Denmark. Which the thesis points out correlates (I know I know) quite neatly with population density. Not many surprises here, as it also correlates nicely when you look at a map of the soil types of Denmark.

Brought to you by: https://data.geus.dk/geusmap/?lang=...tskort_200000,jordartskort_25000,dkskaermkort or as a picture:

The important one here is the light brown one, which represents clay-heavy soils, while the orange and pinkish ones are sandier and thus less suited for agriculture, though not necessarily impossible.

Regarding the population, I do think it is a bit on the low side, but I believe this can be chalked up to this being Denmark in the Kingless times, etc. If you’re set on the numbers, I suggest redistributing the population from areas I think are too high to those that are too low. I will only mention the localisations where I think the population needs to change and not judge every single one to determine if their population makes sense.

Using the above maps, I suggest the following changes to localities, ordered by province:

Vendsyssel-Thy:

• Thisted: Change raw material to wheat, increase population to a number that more adequately represents the population density. Change vegetation to farmland.
• Hjørring: Increase the population, but not as much as Thisted.
• Skagen: I would suggest a change to fish or even salt since Læsø is part of it.

Nørrejylland:

• Aalborg: Change vegetation to grasslands; I think livestock is fine.
• Viborg: Change raw material to wheat.
• Randers: I would do horses here, and have either salt in Kolding or Skagen. Skagen had it until the 1600's while Kolding started producing salt in 1570 and found rock salt later outside the scope of the game.

Western Jutland:(I think I saw a comment where you guys already picked up on that naming mistake )

• Ringkøbing: I think fish is fine; amber could be considered.
• Holstebro: Change to livestock or wool.
• Bølling: Unsure about salt, but I don’t know much about the area; could consider livestock and wool, or less likely, amber.
• Varde: Change raw material to something other than wheat; my suggestion is livestock or wool, but amber and fish would not be questioned too much.(Denmark should never have more than one amber province, but one west coast province would not be too illogical. However, I lean more towards fish and livestock.)

Østjylland:(I think I saw a comment where you guys already picked up on that naming mistake )

• Silkeborg: The population needs to go down, not to the levels of Grindsted, but in my mind, it needs to be at least halved. Change vegetation to woods or flatlands. Raw material could be lumber or wheat, as it is about 50% wooded areas with sandy soils, and 50% decent agricultural producing land but not the best. It is not known for livestock.
• Grindsted: To my knowledge, livestock was more a western Jutland thing; could change it to sand. A bit at a loss, as the area is kind of a nowhere area but not quite western Jutland. Change vegetation to flatlands.
• Aarhus: Fine but population should be way more than Silkeborg, and not equal.
• Kolding: potentially change to salt.
• Kalø: Fine.

Sønderjylland: I generally think these are fine.

Funen:

• Assens: Argument for farmland vegetation, but grassland is fine. I don’t know about any salt production in the area; would suggest changing to wheat.
• Odense: I would change vegetation to farmland, raw material to legumes (for variety’s sake) or wheat. Argument for some of Assens' population to be moved to Odense, as it also contains islands with high population density and is the larger of the two Funen provinces.
• Nakskov: Change vegetation to farmland, change raw material to legumes (if it represents a higher value good than wheat) or wheat. This is historically the land best suited for non-modern agriculture. Historically, it was owned for quite some time by royal bastard lines, who grew wealthy from their land on this island.

Zealand:

• Kalundborg: Argument for farmland over grassland. I do think the population could be increased a bit. I think it produces medicaments? If that is an agricultural-type good, I think it is fine.
• Ringsted: Fine.
• Roskilde: Fine.
• Helsingør: I would move some of the population elsewhere, change vegetation to woods or grassland. Wheat is fine, but fish would also work. Historically, it’s known for being the king's hunting grounds, so the woods there were preserved, but they’re not exactly extensive.

Malmöhus (if the area is Danish culture, why does it have Swedish spelling?)

• Generally, I think they’re fine. I think the population might be low, but I don’t know where to find it. Why is Malmö spelled in a Swedish way when it's Danish culture?
• Argument for Lund to be wheat/legumes/medicaments.

Göing

• I don’t know much about the area; it looks fine.

Halland:

• Looks decent.
• Varberg: I think I would change from sand to wheat.

Blekinge:

• Sölvesborg (why Swedish spelling when Danish culture?) should have an increased population, not much, but to be above its neighbors.
• Rønneby: I would change vegetation to woods; it’s very rocky there. Wheat is fine though.
• Brekne: Change vegetation to woods; see Rønneby reason.

 

[Sulphurologist]

Part 2 - Climate

Climate
View attachment 1165176
Yeah, well. There is a reason I moved to Spain..

I confronted your map with the Köppen classification of 1901-1930 (global temperatures then were more similar to the Early Modern period so should be a more accurate base map for the game.

[EDIT: Nidaros itself is in a continental valley, so perhaps keep Nidaros continental due to its historical significance]

Current Tinto Climate map	Köppen 1901-1930 reclassified into Tinto's classes	Köppen 1901-1930 'raw'	My suggestions for changes based on aforementioned sources

I'd expand Arctic a bit more southward along the Southern Scandes, and more into central Sweden.
Kvinnherad, Suledal, Hjelmeland, Sirudal, Otredal, Åmli, Grenland, Kongsberg, Flesberg, Eidsvoll,
Jösse, Färnebro, Kopparberget, Grythyttan, Skinskatteberg, Söderbärke, Avesta, Hedemora, Gränge, Floda, Lekssan, Orsa, Falun, Ockelbo.

Ørland only has continental climate in the westernmost valleys, and should be arctic overall.
Leranger has continental climate in all the inhabited valleys, so should be continental.
Størdal is entirely Arctic, while the coastal parts of Borgund and Sunnmøre are generally continental.

Around Vättern there are some Arctic parts, so I'd designate Jonköping and Falköping as Arctic.

Denmark has a lot more coastal climate, too: Hjørring, skagen, Aalborg, Randers, Kalø, Kolding, Assens

In Finland Björneborg and Pöytis should be arctic, while Kyyrölä and Kexholm should switch arctic-continental

 

[Linbot#6018]

Why?

Not only does it run along a river, making it a natural border, but there is no other significant historical border I am aware of in this region that would disrupt it. It was not present for most of the game's time period, but I feel that thinking about the map work, people should remember that this game does not only depict the 14th century.

 

[Kairaix]

Will there be other start dates rather than 1337 like in ck3 or hoi? Or it's just gonna be that you can only start playing in 1337.

Only one start date confirmed, but there might be room for one in a future dlc + it is possible to mod in multiple start dates

 

[Bastiram]

Part 2 - Climate


I confronted your map with the Köppen classification of 1901-1930 (global temperatures then were more similar to the Early Modern period so should be a more accurate base map for the game.

Current Tinto Climate map	Köppen 1901-1930 reclassified into Tinto's classes	Köppen 1901-1930 'raw'	My suggestions for changes based on aforementioned sources
View attachment 1165794	View attachment 1165795	View attachment 1165796	View attachment 1165797

I'd expand Arctic a bit more southward along the Southern Scandes, and more into central Sweden.
Kvinnherad, Suledal, Hjelmeland, Sirudal, Otredal, Åmli, Grenland, Kongsberg, Flesberg, Eidsvoll,
Jösse, Färnebro, Kopparberget, Grythyttan, Skinskatteberg, Söderbärke, Avesta, Hedemora, Gränge, Floda, Lekssan, Orsa, Falun, Ockelbo.

Ørland only has continental claimte in the westernmost valleys, and should be arctic overall.
Leranger has continental climate in all the inhabited valleys, so should be continental.
Størdal is entirely Arctic, while the coastal parts of Borgund and Sunnmøre are generally continental.

Around Vättern there are some Arctic parts, so I'd designate Jonköping and Falköping as Arctic.

Denmark has a lot more coastal climate, too: Hjørring, skagen, Aalborg, Randers, Kalø, Kolding, Assens

In Finland Björneborg and Pöytis should be arctic, while Kyyrölä and Kexholm should switch arctic-continental

Question is if one needs to consider the Little Ice Age which happened during the games period ?

 

[Sulphurologist]

Question is if one needs to consider the Little Ice Age which happened during the games period ?

Little Ice Age is tricky as the effects were not identical all over the globe. Check out this post with some more details.
Tl;DR, it should be a 'situation' for continents where some years have harsh winters / severe draughts / excessive rain / failed harvests etc, depending on the continent.

 

[Brynjar]

- the topography near the coast around Sirudal is rather rugged. I'd extend the hills right up to the coast for Jaeren, Flekkefjord and Lindesnes, or perhaps a plateau here or there. Ortedal is elevated, but largely flat so I'd designate that as a plateau.
- Nidaros and Skaun are relatively flat, but too rugged to be considered flatlands. Plateau is an excellent alternative due to lage parts of those locations exceeding 500m in height.

The topography for Norway is generally quite diffucult to find a good alternative for. The terrain tends to change too frequently for a single type of topography to be used for an entire location. The more rugged parts will in many cases not necessarily be relevant for the people there, but may in some cases make it difficult to move an army there. Do we know what ingame effects the topography will have?

 

[Brynjar]

I guess the berries are a rarity indeed, but it seemed that to the Sami people even today it is an important part of their living/generating some money.

That is a frequently used arguemnt for not allowing strangers to pick the berries, but if you were to do a deep dive into their economy there will likely be very few who actually use it to an extend which the law requires to forbid it.

 

[Fjellfyr]

This would make this area be one of the densest in locations in Europe, but also very depopulated, and basically useless.

Ah, I misjudging using Fana and Bergen as a measuring stick then.

Would this be better then? Its +3 provinces, but one is primarily reclaimed from wasteland. Very hastily put together. About similar size to Sunnmøre province.

- Nordfjord become Eid, or Stad.
- Stryn is made out of the wasteland for the eastern half of the fjord.
- Sunnfjord remains, gains wasteland in Jølster area, loses what it holds in sogn.
- Lavik is created from northern part of Nordhordland and southern part of Sunnfjord. Includes the island and both sides of the outer part of the fjord.
- Sogndal province is split in two. Sogndal is now the northern part of the fjord.
- Lærdal gains the inner part of the fjord. Would likely be bigger as there is a bit much wasteland here where people settled along rivers.
- Aurland is renamed to Vik and doesn't stretch as far south.

Lavik would produce stone and Sogndal would produce fruit.

Sunnfjord, Stryn, Eid would be Firda province.

Lavik, Vik, Sogndal, Lærdal would be Sogn province.

Alternatively, combine them to Sogn of Fjordane or Nordre Bergenshus.

 

[Johan]

What is the reason for Scania being a dominion insted of being integrated?

Because the King viewed it as a seperate kingdom, and titled himself King of Norway, Sweden and Skåne.

 

[Johan]

Gellivaara is indeed strange, seems to be some weird mashup. It's Jällivaare in Finnish or Jiellevárri/várre in Sami or Jellivaara in Mieänkieli.

Actually, I found that name in a few old maps.

 

[Sevonen]

Locations
View attachment 1165164

if I give city rights to tingvalla, will the name change to karlstad?

 

[Gavyco723]

Why would you as a player waste your government doing that? And it still would take 150+ years.

You underestimate peoples want to create ethnostates unfortunately, not my thing, but more power to them I guess. Wouldn’t surprise me seeing full Serbian Balkans.

 

[DoctorSnakes]

What's up with the naming of the locations/provinces? Not only is most of it modern, but there are also inconsistencies. For example, Trondheim is called Nidaros here, which was indeed (mostly) the name used at the time for the city (Trondheim was originally the name for the area in general apparently, attested here as "Þrondhæimi" and "Nidarose" in 1338). However, you then have Bergen instead of Bjørgvin (or a derivative of Bjørgvin, like "Biorghwin" attested here in 1337), which was the form used at the time. Forms closer to Bergen came at the end of the 1300s (source).

I would love to know by what criteria you pick your toponyms. For all I know, the inconsistency could be intentional, and you are trying to make the various names legible in modern Norwegian with some historical older forms sprinkled in. Without knowing the intentions behind the naming, there isn't much that me or anyone else can do to help with sources or other information. If one of the devs has already addressed this topic, then please reply to me with a link so I can read it.

 

[Red_warning]

You underestimate peoples want to create ethnostates unfortunately, not my thing, but more power to them I guess. Wouldn’t surprise me seeing full Serbian Balkans.

Honestly, I think if the bonuses aren't worth the effort then then most players will simply not be bothered with it.

 

[Polesie Admiral]

are there any situations in the region?

 

[Pbhuh]

Alright having taken some time to check everything, I've just put some numbers on paper to really get a grasp of things.

Denmark in this dev diary (slesvig & skane included) has 42 locations. It has a population of 711K + 135K + 193K (denmark, slesvig and skane)
The Nothern Netherlands by comparison (a relatively high density area and roughly similar sized) has about 44. From what I could gather, the population numbers are somewhat similar at least in 1300.

Now Norway, which on this map has a population of 469K. Meanwhile Norway on this map has 113 locations. 113. While it's true that norway has around 10x more land area, it's still a bit lopsided I think.

I've highlighted the Eiderstedt peninsula in red in the population map as the dev diary didn't include the locations.

1. This is Aabenraa
2. I would suggest adding in Sonderborg, it gained city rights before the startdate and had plenty of military significance.
3. From maps I've seen, Ribe seemed to have been a bit smaller in size and was often part of the kingdom of denmark with these borders instead of the larger bit covering all of Tønder as well.
4. Similarly I would also go with Tønder as a location as it also received town privileges before the startdate

Lastly I wanna again draw attention to the Uthlande or the Nord Frisian Islands which used to be much more massive in size.
The Town of Rungholt is said to have had a population of about 3000 before being drowned into the sea during the Groote Mandrenke or Saint Marcellus Flood, which in total killed around 25000 people.

A map from 1600 still showing the outlines of the island and the bay in which rungholt sank.

Now with regards to this comment.

1 - no we wont increase it.

So is this for the entire region of Northern Europe or is it more of a guideline? If so, perhaps a compromise could be made to merge some locations in norway as it seems overly dense with many provinces having 8 or more locations, while in Europa Universalis they were just that, one singular province. Meanwhile there are eve more provinces than vanilla eu4 if I recall correctly, while other regions of the world have seen their province number be reduced. Because I really think Denmark sits below the reasonable number of locations.

Ok, so i've got some feedback on Denmark. Most of it will be centered alround the layout of locations and provinces, but i'll just go over everything else first:

On the topic of location densety. I think a few more locations could go far to make the map make more sense, especially on Funen and Zealand. How is Copenhagen not a seperate location?!

Yea, This is what i'm trying to say as well, Denmark in comparison to Norway and Sweden has very few locations.

Provinces:

Thay make no sense. Western Jutland is in English, while Østjylland is in Danish. Need consistency. Also they are swapped. Nørrejylland incompased all of Jutland north of Kongeåen, not just that small bit. In general, the names of Sønderjylland and Nørrejylland might just be better as area names, rather than province names. It makes a lot of sense to make Funen control langeland and Ærø, but giving them Lolland-Falster is so wierd. Just give it to Zealand, like it normally is. Bornholm seems to be part of Zealand. It should be part of one of the Scanian provinces. At the treaty of Roskilde, it was given to sweden together with the reast of Scania.

Here is how I would make the location. I tried to follow the Syssel system in Jutland, and otherwise just following either the Amts (The 1662 versions), or the smaller fiefs.
View attachment 1165417

And here is the Provinces.

View attachment 1165418

I think having south jutland there is not the best solution as you said yourself, it leads to confusion. South Jutland should be synonymous with Schleswig and I think it would be better to be more consistant in that regard than having both as shown by paradox or having south jutland moved up to above schleswig.

I prefer Schleswig myself like you have done, so you can have a north and south province, instead of being stuck with South South Jutland and North South Jutland

The locations you put together with it I would probably merge into the East Jutland province and Hardsyssel/West Jutland province.

View attachment 1165451

So this density is just insane. While I respect your work as it is very detailed, this is definitely too much, this would be like putting 1000 locations in france.

 

[Jespoke]

Most of my suggestions about Denmark have been mentioned by different people in this thread already, but I want to point them out anyway:

• A Svendborg location on the southern part of Fyn and Langeland would make sense, and solve how odd the big Odense location is.
• Himmerland makes for a good name for the province currently named Nørrejylland.
• Kalø and Hammershus are significant fortifications in their respective locations, but they are not towns. The locations would fit in better with everything else being named after significant towns if they were renamed to Ebeltoft and Rønne respectively
• Culturally, a Danish majority with significant German minority should reach further south in Flensborg and Slesvig.
• Salt is certainly not a bad pick for a good for Randers, but it was most famous for its horse market.

Aside from that, I had another thing I was going to comment on, but found in my research that you were right:

• My gut feeling was that Samsø, the little island above Fyn, was tied more closely to Aarhus than Kalundborg. But when researching it, it turns out that while that was indeed the case in the middle ages and the modern day, it is accurate to the time period of this game for Samsø to be under administrative divisions (Len and later Amt) of north-western Sjælland.