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

[Daniel the Finlander]

We need better names for the "Paltamo" and "Sotkamo" locations then.

I disagree, historically Paltamo (sw. Paldamo) and Sotkamo were both important locations since the area was settled in the 1500s. Paltamo was even founded before Kajaani (sw. Kajana) was. I was just suggesting the location shapes to be changed slightly.

If you mean giving them names that’d be accurate in 1337, that’s harder as the area wasn’t really settled, and was used by Sami and Karelians for travel and hunting. So what is your policy on uncolonized location names? Should they have names used by the natives at the time, or names that later settlers gave them during the game’s time period?

 

[Johan]

I disagree, historically Paltamo (sw. Paldamo) and Sotkamo were both important locations since the area was settled in the 1500s. Paltamo was even founded before Kajaani (sw. Kajana) was. I was just suggesting the location shapes to be changed slightly.

If you mean giving them names that’d be accurate in 1337, that’s harder as the area wasn’t really settled, and was used by Sami and Karelians for travel and hunting. So what is your policy on uncolonized location names? Should they have names used by the natives at the time, or names that later settlers gave them during the game’s time period?

Paltamo would be huge if it contained the southern shore as well..

Anyway, redrew them to inclue Paltamo and Sotkamo...

 

[Kiyomizunomiya Yukisa]

Hi Johan.
Will the Sami or Kwen people form nations on the map over time?

 

[Boxtrot]

Do you know of a better alternative?

I proposed Rödeby

 

[Engram]

Paltamo would be huge if it contained the southern shore as well..

Anyway, redrew them to inclue Paltamo and Sotkamo...

Petition for reinstating Sotkamo! Don't do me dirty like this

 

[Daniel the Finlander]

Petition for reinstating Sotkamo! Don't do me dirty like this

I think he meant that he redrew both locations to include the real life settlements lol, as that was the point of my feedback (the settlements were outside the borders of the locations)

 

[Milites]

Personally, I think it's exciting to see the Danish interregnum portrayed in a PDOX game and love the fresh perspective on the Scandinavian region afforded by a new start date!

Others have already made valid remarks on the issues relating to locations, naming and the cultural border for the Danish region, so I won't comment on these.

However, it seems as if the island of Bornholm remains a part of the 'Danish' tag (which should probably be divided in some way between the Holsatian pawnholders in lieu of some sort of soon-to-be-revealed mechanic), which I don't believe is entirely accurate.

Bornholm was an integral part of the Scanian countries and a possession of the archepiscopal see of Lund to boot. Archbishop Carl Eriksen was instrumental in using the peasant insurrection of 1332 as a staging point for bringing Scania under the governance of Magnus Eriksson Smek. Which brings me to my second point: I think it would be more accurate to portray Scania as a Swedish personal union subject. Magnus liberally used the title of "King of Scania" and even petitioned Pope Benedict XII to affirm his control over the Sound Provinces by referring to the voluntary nature of the estates' oath of affirmation in their election of him as their king.

The Scanian situation is a bit more complicated than this with various deeds and credit notes being made between the House of Estridsen, the Holsatians, the local nobility, the Church and the House of Bjälbo.

In case you might find it useful, a few years ago I made a map of the administrative, ecclesiastical and urban divisions of Denmark at the turn of the late medieval period. The fiefs are not comparable, but the border of the hundreds changed very little over the course of the centuries.

 

[EleventhAvenue]

Hello! I'm not a geography expert but I'm pretty interested in northwestern Sweden (because I live there, in absolutely nowhere). I imagine representing this area was pretty tricky because it was settled quite late and might not have appropriate names for the time period. So, with that, I have two thoughts:

The province Abisko is named after a locality that seems to have only been founded with the construction of the railway there in 1899/1903, as far as I can see. The sami name Ábeskovvu it is based on is as I understand it older, but it was not a settled place, only an unsettled location. May i suggest Sjangeli instead? It is the name of small village founded in the 1600s that housed a copper mine and based on what I could find it's the oldest settlement in the area of the province called Abisko.

Sarek is just... odd? I don't think there's anything to support there was even a place called Sarek in 1836? I think the area was only really settled after the timeframe of the game? I don't really think it's possible to transit an army through there? Based on what I could find maybe Saltoluokta after a periodically inhabited place used by the Sami or Sirges/Sirkas which is the sameby that covers that territory. But I don't know if using samebyar to name localities in the game is appropriate for the time period... or for what the localities are trying to represent.

Juckasjarvi seems to be correct spelling for the time period but it is such a funny name!!

I don't know if what I suggested is actually better than what you have on the map right now, but I thought it would be worth to bring up, at least.

 

[Andy_Dandy]

Map of the main districts or hovedlen in Norway arround 1500. Bergenshus Len, Akershus Len, Båhuslen and Trondhjems Len. Here you can also see the sub distrikts of the main districts. The Northern areas not shown on the map, like Hålogaland, was under the main district of Bergenshus Len.

For instance you can see that the province the game calls Østfold was called Smålenene.

 

[Johan]

I think he meant that he redrew both locations to include the real life settlements lol, as that was the point of my feedback (the settlements were outside the borders of the locations)

yes, thats what I did

 

[Baphomet enjoyer]

How will the Danish Interregnum be represented?

 

[Krey_Lollipop]

The province Abisko is named after a locality that seems to have only been founded with the construction of the railway there in 1899/1903, as far as I can see. The sami name Ábeskovvu it is based on is as I understand it older, but it was not a settled place, only an unsettled location. May i suggest Sjangeli instead? It is the name of small village founded in the 1600s that housed a copper mine and based on what I could find it's the oldest settlement in the area of the province called Abisko.

I can't say I know much about that area in particular, but when I've heard it mentioned in tornedalic, or what the game calls kven history, Torneträsk tends to be the focal point. The local inhabitants of the river valley would periodically go there to fish and hunt, and supposedly it was a pretty big deal.

I don't know how well it'd work conventionwise to name a location after a lake though. But then again, with all the other järvis, jaurs and träsks (=lake) around I don't think it would stick out.

 

[afb]

I have no idea about what is historical or not, but having Kalundborg produce medicaments is objectively funny.

 

[ShishRobot]

will the iceland+greenland map be posted today on the forum?

 

[Bergenboy]

Would be interesting to see more dynamic name changes based upon a Scandinavian culture group owning a location. I have a few examples to use in the British isles (not sure if this is the wrong Tinto maps to do that but nevertheless). Most Scandinavians in this forum is most likely aware of York being called Jorvik or Constantinople going under the name Miklagard, which also would be interesting to see represented in game, but I will focus on locations closer to Scandinavia than the Mediterranean.

My sources for the dynamic name changes all stem from Snorre Sturlason's "Heimskringla" and his different sagas for the Norwegian Kings. "Heimskringla" was written in the 13th century so most of these would still be used by Scandinavians by 1337. I would also mentioned that the Heimskringla edition that I'm referencing is written in modern Norwegian, but where the author has tried to keep the place names as original as possible. My edition of "Heimskringla" is from 2012 and translated by Kjell Arild Pollestad if anyone wants to fact check my sources.

Thurso - Torså, the Harald's sons saga, page 786.

Lewis - Ljodhus, Magnus Barefoot's saga, page 700.

Uist - Ivist, Magnus Barefoot's saga, page 700.

Skye - Skid, Magnus Barefoot's saga, page 700.

Mull - Myl, Magnus Barefoot's saga, page 700.

Islay - Il, Magnus Barefoot's saga, page 700.

Kintyre - Saltire/Santire, Magnus Barefoot's saga, page 700.

Aberdeen - Apardjon, Harald's sons saga, page 787.

In Yorkshire i also have to mention Whitby - Hvitaby, Harald's sons saga, page 787.

And for the final dynamic name change I propose using Scarborough - Skardaborg, Harald Hardrada saga, page 674.

This would add some nice flavor for players when using Scandinavian cultured tags and create a slightly more immersive gameplay.

 

[Red_warning]

Personally I would prefer more moderns names, namely because the game is going to last a very long time and to me it would just be a bit odd to see Norse names still in the 1600s. I think in that case i would prefer names that are before their time early in the game, to be honest.

 

[Brynjar]

I did some map work on the south of Norway to make it more interesting. The names are quite old, but the language should still be norse in 1337. It's easy to choose a more modern naming convention if desired. I'm probably not gonna finish this entirely so I'm posting it since it covers most impassable areas that would make gameplay more interesting.

So you want both Orkdal and Orkdalr? That doesn't make sense. Orkdal is rather misplaced in the current map, but the solution is not to simply add a province with an older variation of the name.

Also, I generally disagree that using old forms of the names just for the sake of using old forms is a good idea. By 1337 the -r ending for "dal" already appears to be outdated. For example we can take a look at Magnus Lagabøte's will from 1277 where we find names such as "Orkdals fulke", "Gudbran(dz)dalom" and "Naumdale" (Namdal): https://www.dokpro.uio.no/cgi-bin/middelalder/diplom_vise_tekst.cgi?b=3472
Or this document from 1347 mentioning "Raumssdalle" (Romsdal): https://www.dokpro.uio.no/cgi-bin/middelalder/diplom_vise_tekst.cgi?b=1404
I could go on and on with the examples. Doing a search for "%dalr" in the text field in Diplomatarium Norvegicum gives a grand total documents. Searching for just "%dal" gives 846. Yes, many of those 846 are from well after the start of the game, but even before 1337 there are more uses of "dal"/"dale" than "dalr".

We can also probably find 5 or more different spellings for each location since people seems to have spelled it however they wanted. Namdal could for example be spelled Nwmedal (Numedal, not to be confused with the location called Numedal), Nomedal, Nommedal, and variants of those with either -r, -er -e or -en endings. We could also end up with at least two locations called some old version of "Skaun" in Trøndelag alone. I would generally advise sticking to somewhat modern forms of the pre-Danish names. (I will provide my own suggestions later on, but want to make sure I provide consistent suggestions for most of Norway, which turns out to take som time).

Now, we don't have any hard numbers on population from 1300s, and anything we have tend to be estimates based on numbers from 1600s. However, something we DO have hard numbers on is the military expectations of the various regions, with exception of the region north of hålogaland and the region between trøndelag and borgarting (so the inner valleys).

That is not entirely true. We have numbers on of ships expected to be equipped and manned in certain areas, but we don't know exactly what the numbers entailed in each region, nor how they changed over time. There are variations we don't know the reason for. Also, one oarsman per 7 people is not set in stone. It was more of a maximum number at full "mobilization", but each "fylke" were to field whatever number of ships had been agreed with the king.

Based on this, my suggestion is to transfer some of the population from borgarting-region, to what would be primarily the long stretch hålogaland->sogn including trøndelag.

That is a highly problematic method, in part because skipreide was primarily a coastal thing.

Another problem is that your source here (and your interpretation of it) is inaccurate. There is no explanation for "Sønnafjelske", this usually means Norway South of the Dovre mountains, but in Gulatingslova they are called "Vikverir" (or Vikværer in a more modern form). That most likely excludes fairly high population locations such as Eidsvoll (and anything further north, such as Ringsaker, Hamar and Kongsvinger). The number of ships here is also unclear, as the "grænaskip" (ship(s) of the people of Grenland (including Skien) are in addition to the 60. Vikeværer would most likely be people from the area maked in purple on this map (The red marking is a later ("medieval" meaning, but likely not what is meant in Gulatingslova, as that would leave some significant parts missing):

Viken (region) - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The number of ships listed in Gulatingslova can be found here. My understanding of Gothic handwriting is rather limited, but the relevant section can be found on line 3-4 in the screenshot below:

Source (page 280): https://www.fylkesarkivet.no/?cat=384572&viewsig=SFFda-101359
A modern translation is available here: https://www.nb.no/items/66f3b7c31b636967fcd73c1620a39120?page=251
They should both be possible to access for free without any log in, but may be region locked to Norwegian IPs.

It is also worth pointing out that for Hålogaland (that is basically everything north of Namdal/Nord-Trøndelag) The distribution of the ships are specified as 7 ships in the southern half, and 6 in the northern half "as they are charged with guarding against the east" (my translation), which indicates that the number of ships may not be purely a matter of population numbers. In additon there is one 30 seater (which your own numbers didn't include) which is for an unspecified area, but thought to be assigned to the northern defense.

Naumadal-region seem most critical to change, as it can't actually field its oarsmen with Caesar's pop, much less the full crew.

It should probably be pointed out that the Naumadal region here means a region corresponding with the northern parts of Nord-Trøndelag, not the location of Numedal, nor just the location of Namdal. That said, the population in this area may be a bit low.

Edit: I accidentially closed the wrong browser tab and missed some changes which ended up being rolled back when reopeningthe forum tab. Hopefully the important changes should be re-corrected now.

 

[Fjellfyr]

That is not entirely true. We have numbers on of ships expected to be equipped and manned in certain areas, but we don't know exactly what the numbers entailed in each region, nor how they changed over time. There are variations we don't know the reason for. Also, one oarsman per 7 people is not set in stone. It was more of a maximum number at full "mobilization", but each "fylke" were to field whatever number of ships had been agreed with the king.

Yes, it was a maximum number. Some of the regions here couldn't fulfill its requirements based on the maximum the king could demand though, which is a concern. There is a reason why I specifically only used oarsmen, because while exactly how many is on each ship could vary, a 20-seater and a 25-seater still has a specific amount of oarsmen.

That is a highly problematic method, in part because skipreide was primarily a coastal thing.

That was said in the post, and the entire comparison was between the coastal areas covered by the map. I'm not sure what the problem here is.

Another problem is that your source here (and your interpretation of it) is inaccurate. There is no explanation for "Sønnafjelske", this usually means Norway South of the Dovre mountains, but in Gulatingslova they are called "Vikverir" (or Vikværer in a more modern form). That most likely excludes fairly high population locations such as Eidsvoll (and anything further north, such as Ringsaker, Hamar and Kongsvinger).

It absolutely excluded Eidsvoll, Ringsaker, Hamar and Kongsvinger, as seen on the map, being the Borgartingregion or as you say, Vikværer. We don't have to speculate.

Which is why I didn't include those population numbers anywhere and stated so in the post, That region need to be estimated on its own. If that was what you feared to be inaccurate, at least that concern can be put to rest. Otherwise I'm not entirely sure what is meant to be inaccurate here, what you say I agree with but also isn't at odds with the post. You've corrected the info into what was already the case.

I agree sønnafjelske is a normally wide usage of the term but here specifically meant the skipreide part the sønnafjelske area, which is the area of Borgarting, or as you say Viken.

From counting areas on the map, about 413k of the 469k norwegian population in Project Caesar is within what be considered skipreide.

The original posts' map is from Norsk Historisk Leksikon ca 1500-1800. I'll find the another map from the book with the table (which is virtually identical) and add it, if that helps clear up what region was talked about. I used borgarting and not sønnafjelske in the post myself, to make clear what the region was.

This is the same area as you've shown on your map (excluding grenland), and what you're quoting in gulatingsloven give the same number for the region. This is more a discussion of synonyms than it is about accuracy.



EDIT:

Map from the book with tables, Norsk Krigshistorie Bind 1 - Krigsmakt og Kongemakt, showing what it meant with Sønnafjelske when it comes to skipreide. Specifically, Borgartingslagen (Vikværingane).

The number of ships here is also unclear, as the "grænaskip" (ship(s) of the people of Grenland (including Skien) are in addition to the 60. Vikeværer would most likely be people from the area maked in purple on this map (The red marking is a later ("medieval" meaning, but likely not what is meant in Gulatingslova, as that would leave some significant parts missing):

I agree on the uncertainty about the grænaskip, so I think the population should be higher than its percentage of leidang. But thats specifically nedre telemark, and the big majority of population of the region would be covered by the 60 ships.

What the *exact* proportions should be I am unsure of. But right now, eastern norway has close to half the population of Norway (almost 190k from viken region, another 30k+ in inland), a percentage it wouldn't have for centuries.

Even if we're generous with the ships from grenland, it seems disproprotionally populated compared to any source I can find. I have no issue calculating the region grenlandskipene would come from as its own thing. It still leaves the numbers as still dispropotionately high in the region.

Trøndelag have been given close to 1/3rd of vikens population in Project Caesar, but were expected to field more oarsmen.

Same with bergenshus (hordaland + firda + sogn).

Rogaland were expected to field half. Møre og Romsdal was a bit short but not far off from viken.

If the stretch of the north and northwest coast would need to break their own law to legally field a full crew (unlikely to happen in reality, but was a theoretical expectation), that does seem to suggest that these areas are underpopulated in comparison to reality.

You're right on the 30-seater though, I missed it when adding up the numbers. Hålogaland should be higher due to it. Though, it being special make as the only 30-seater may have been for heightened security reasons further north.

EDIT:

It should probably be pointed out that the Naumadal region here means a region corresponding with the northern parts of Nord-Trøndelag, not the location of Numedal, nor just the location of Namdal. That said, the population in this area may be a bit low.

Yes, Naumadal would be the location of Namdal + a few of the nearby locations. I tried to grab some that aligned with the map, though possible I grabbed wrong. Namdal location itself has 1035 pops in Caesar.

Ideally, the way population mechanics work in Project Caesar with climate and topography and so on will allow eastern norway to over time become the most populated part. But starting out with half the population seem wrong, even if we ignore leidang completely and use the 1600s estimate.

 

[ivj9]

So you want both Orkdal and Orkdalr? That doesn't make sense. Orkdal is rather misplaced in the current map, but the solution is not to simply add a province with an older variation of the name.

Also, I generally disagree that using old forms of the names just for the sake of using old forms is a good idea. By 1337 the -r ending for "dal" already appears to be outdated. For example we can take a look at Magnus Lagabøte's will from 1277 where we find names such as "Orkdals fulke", "Gudbran(dz)dalom" and "Naumdale" (Namdal): https://www.dokpro.uio.no/cgi-bin/middelalder/diplom_vise_tekst.cgi?b=3472
Or this document from 1347 mentioning "Raumssdalle" (Romsdal): https://www.dokpro.uio.no/cgi-bin/middelalder/diplom_vise_tekst.cgi?b=1404
I could go on and on with the examples. Doing a search for "%dalr" in the text field in Diplomatarium Norvegicum gives a grand total documents. Searching for just "%dal" gives 846. Yes, many of those 846 are from well after the start of the game, but even before 1337 there are more uses of "dal"/"dale" than "dalr".

We can also probably find 5 or more different spellings for each location since people seems to have spelled it however they wanted. Namdal could for example be spelled Nwmedal (Numedal, not to be confused with the location called Numedal), Nomedal, Nommedal, and variants of those with either -r, -er -e or -en endings. We could also end up with at least two locations called some old version of "Skaun" in Trøndelag alone. I would generally advise sticking to somewhat modern forms of the pre-Danish names. (I will provide my own suggestions later on, but want to make sure I provide consistent suggestions for most of Norway, which turns out to take som time).

You're missing the case system. Place-names in the nominative case (which is where you will almost exclusively find the -r ending) are of course going to be rare in written text because places are typically being referred to rather than simply named, especially in texts like this. Comparing the number of hits in old texts really doesn't mean much.

The 1347 text in particular has "Olafuer", "Erlingr" and "aadr" in the nominative case, so this form is clearly still present. That's expected as this stage of Norwegian still has all four cases. The most I think you can say is that -r is starting to shift towards -er, as you can see in "Olafuer".

 

[Linbot#6018]

Personally I would prefer more moderns names, namely because the game is going to last a very long time and to me it would just be a bit odd to see Norse names still in the 1600s. I think in that case i would prefer names that are before their time early in the game, to be honest.

I'd agree with this yeah. The game is not exclusively supposed to depict the 14th century! Playing in Scandinavia in the 1700s with old norse names everywhere would feel a lot worse than playing in Scandinavia in the 1300s with modern sounding names.