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

[Danskjävel]

The same can be said for Scandinavia though, and the idea of the north at least has existed and could be brought back in this period if a concept was needed. Unlike Scandinavia which wasn't even invented as a word at this point. The nordic kingdoms always has a concept of a kingship, they don't refer to this by any specific term in this era but there did exist one prior to this and it was norden/Norðrlönd. While Scandinavia is far more anarchronistic.

As for it being an ill defined area, so was the netherlands prior to a country in the region deciding to call themselves that.

As for you authorative opinion, I presented you primary sources from the period. These are not in dispute. I can list all the sagas where the the word shows up if you like me too. These are texts from this period or before this period. Showing there very much was a concept of norden. To dispute this you would ahev to argue that both Olaus Petri's work and the sagas are actually forgeries. And to make that claim you will need evidence not just an authoritative opinion.

I'm not contesting that there are mentions of Norðrlönd, or that people back then had an idea of similarity between others who spoke the same (or dialects of the same) language.

I'm disputing extrapolating said concept into meaning Norden/Nordic/the North as a coherent concept with agreed upon meaning. Drawing lines between that, "Lion of the North", the medieval text and that a Scandinavian/Nordic (in a modern sense) empire in the 15th century would be called "Nordic Union" or "Union of the Northern Crowns" implies a general understanding of "the North" that I don't think is evident. That concepts exists is interesting, but we need to clarify their correlation and their meaning to arrive at the conclusion that an hypothetical entity would be called X or Y.
"Nordic" doesn't appear until much later as far as I've read, so that's definitely not what it would be called. But I'm happy to be proved wrong.

I don't have access to the medieval text, so you're welcome to quote it. The Wiki article makes the mistake of conflating Nordic with the North too.

As I wrote earlier, using 'Northern' to describe this hypothetical entity might well be a good idea, but the historical correlation between concepts we today associate (or even use synonymously as Norden/Scandinavien) is not all that clear.

 

[zobo]

I wonder how many novels worth of text people have wasted on "this province should actually have this name" when dynamic province names is a confirmed feature. The exact same thing happened with the Egypt map talk. A quarter or so of all the comments were people complaining that Jerusalem should be Al-Quds. People spend so much time making these lists without contextualizing themselves to what they're responding to.

Ah, but here we have a hodgepodge of names using either swedish or finnish names for the places in no logical way whatsoever. If all the areas sweden contols were using their swedish names, that would be understandable. They are not.

Because they are not, there should be a logic behind all of it. Maybe have the areas with swedish settlement (the coast, really, and up to the provice west of helsinki) is a good compromise. All finnish names for provices in finland, finnish names for provinces with 50%+ finnish population, also good. Of course the population breakdown between swedish and finnish in 1337 is pretty much asspull anyway.

 

[Thorum]

So, checked out the geography of Finnmark fjord coast on what to change to make gameplay more interesting,

Continuing along the coast is Tromso state. Apologies in advance for the missing lines through Øs everywhere
Tinto map :

My map : yellow = location borders, red = impassable. sea zone borders in dark blue

So, I actually mostly agree with the tinto map in this area.
1) The southwestern part of Raisa seems really disconnected, I'd put the wasteland up to the fjord and have the connection be a water crossing to Troms. I also don't see a direct connection to Kasivarren province, so I changed the shape of the impassable area a bit.
2) Troms no futher issues apart from the above, though I'd probably put the western border a bit more east to keep the fjords together.
3) I'm not really happy with the Lofoten not being islands. So I'm putting the "different" option here, which unfortunately ignores state borders. #3 is Senja plus part of Bardodalen
4) New province from southern half of Bardodalen and the mainland bit of Trondenes
5) Island province of Trondenes
6) island province of the western Lofoten
7) Ofoti (name ? current Narvik) takes most of what is drawn as Hamaroy, up to the fjord. I don't find a way to connect the currently drawn location directly through Sarek to Sweden, and the water crossing here seems appropriate. Hamaroy is on the west side of the crossing
8) Hamaroy becomes really small, and can probably be combined in one location with Steigen between Ofoto and Bodo

 

[BurnBird]

Ah, but here we have a hodgepodge of names using either swedish or finnish names for the places in no logical way whatsoever. If all the areas sweden contols were using their swedish names, that would be understandable. They are not.

Because they are not, there should be a logic behind all of it. Maybe have the areas with swedish settlement (the coast, really, and up to the provice west of helsinki) is a good compromise. All finnish names for provices in finland, finnish names for provinces with 50%+ finnish population, also good. Of course the population breakdown between swedish and finnish in 1337 is pretty much asspull anyway.

The logic is that dynamic province names aren't fully implemented yet and seeing as Scandinavia was the first region designed, it was probably also the first one to start recieving dynamic province names. It's also been many weeks since the Iberia tinto map, where they said they had been testing dynamic province names in Catalonia. Arguing about what language a province name should be in is a less than worthless exercise at this point in development.

For other people, there's also no need to post Finnish and Swedish names for all the provinces shown. I'm sure the Devs have no problem finding those names as a singular Google search immediately gives you both versions.

 

[Torakka]

The logic is that dynamic province names aren't fully implemented yet and seeing as Scandinavia was the first region designed, it was probably also the first one to start recieving dynamic province names. It's also been many weeks since the Iberia tinto map, where they said they had been testing dynamic province names in Catalonia. Arguing about what language a province name should be in is a less than worthless exercise at this point in development.

Above part I agree with.

For other people, there's also no need to post Finnish and Swedish names for all the provinces shown. I'm sure the Devs have no problem finding those names as a singular Google search immediately gives you both versions.

However, this I disagree with. While you are mostly correct that finding alternative language variants is generally easy, there is likely going to be still quite a many non-trivial cases, where a simple Google search might give wrong or no answer, like if location X had different Swedish name in 17th century than now, while the Finnish name for the same location was same in 17th century as it is now or some location Y had different spelling in Russian now than it did in 16th century. Also, it is just ever so slightly easier for devs to implement names if they can just look at some post here instead of both looking at some post here and googling the translations for names. If some enthusiastic poster had already spent the effort looking for those alternative names, then that's an effort devs don't need to spend.

 

[Aethilias]

View attachment 1165469

So you can find my comments on Norway's population (and some other things) here:
Adjusting Norway's Population and Climate

 

[Friedrich von Deutschland]

well, i wanted MORE than just a few thousand people working with it

I don’t follow this. If historically it peaked at a little over 4k employed shouldn’t that be what is required to achieve a historical degree of significance, with the option to expand further being avalible?

 

[blaedvardbla]

Would really appreciate a screenshot! That sounds about right for Finnmark, but way too low for Lofoten and Helgeland. I want to compare it properly with the census from 1769 for detailed data and good estimates from the 1600s (when Norway's population was back to around the same level as before the Black death).

Its important to remember that by then the danish rule had already started to impact Norway quite a lot and especially the population distribution so it dosent paint an entirely accurate picture of how many lived in each region in pre plauge days

 

[Bastiram]

Well we can see some of the suggested changes to localisations made it into southern Denmark from the German maps. eg Fyn split into 3 localisations, Lolland and Falster being separate localisations, with changes to vegetation and goods!

 

[zobo]

The logic is that dynamic province names aren't fully implemented yet and seeing as Scandinavia was the first region designed, it was probably also the first one to start recieving dynamic province names. It's also been many weeks since the Iberia tinto map, where they said they had been testing dynamic province names in Catalonia. Arguing about what language a province name should be in is a less than worthless exercise at this point in development.

For other people, there's also no need to post Finnish and Swedish names for all the provinces shown. I'm sure the Devs have no problem finding those names as a singular Google search immediately gives you both versions.

The names they did give us, in a sort of preliminary version, were put there without much logic, some of them plain wrong. They want us to comment.

Not only is that not certain, they have had that swedish version of Inari, Enare all the way from EU IV, maybe earlier. Not that EU IV has anything to do with this game, but if they didn't change it for this round, they probably wouldn't fix it without input.

Furthermore, googling Finnish names is not the only thing to do. There's also checking the map placements, substituting current names with more appropriate names for 1337 when possible.

We point out the mistakes, actual and logical, in order to help the Paradox devs and to make the end product better. Why are you trying to dissuade us?

 

[Johan]

I don’t follow this. If historically it peaked at a little over 4k employed shouldn’t that be what is required to achieve a historical degree of significance, with the option to expand further being avalible?

yeah, but I wanted MORE ...

 

[Futski]

Well we can see some of the suggested changes to localisations made it into southern Denmark from the German maps. eg Fyn split into 3 localisations, Lolland and Falster being separate localisations, with changes to vegetation and goods!

Ringsted has also been divided, so there is a Vordingborg location. And it looks like there is a Tønder location too.

 

[nonninja]

Hi.
I feel the 500m limit on flatland is to high. I find it hard to agree that all of the south of Sweden is flatlands like Danmark, or the Netherlands. As a map enjoyer like you guys here i linked a topografy map of the area that shows the hills and valleysWith all the locations its should be possible to put in moredetail.
I cant wait to play the game and I love the talks



 

[kaapeli22]

There is no way there were that many swedes in finland during those times. also how are there swedish majority provinces that arent even owned by sweden. why would oulu for example be swedish majority? also the provinces wouldnt be 100% catholic.

 

[Myballsyourchin]

yeah, will be on a monday or so..it has been

yeah, will be on a monday or so..

it has been two mondays... where is iceland and greenland? I want to confirm if you have Greenlandic Norse because I need that so much...

 

[ClayProof]

There is a tendency in Swedish historical circles especially those based in Stockholm to undervalue the importance of Götaland.

I'd argue for both a slight population increase around the important centre's as well as one if the legume provinces in the "Västgötaslätten" might be worth turning into a wheat province.

 

[Shu'al]

Several more provinces south of Lappland should have partially sami pops.
Map over Sami territories in Jämtlands län 18th-19th century attached.

Source: Karta öfver norra Sverige utvisande lapparnas skattefjäll, flyttningsvägar m.m. .... 1883. [Beskrivning. (bl. 2) Tryckt hos Gen.stabens Lit. Anst.] [2 bl. pappet, tryck

 

[TaliTek]

Love it so far! I have two suggestions. The first is to change the name of Vesterålen from "Langenes" to "Hofðasegl" or just "Hadsel", since that has always historically been the centre of the region, at least from a church and trade standpoint.
The second is to have consistency with Lófótr and Ófótr. It seems strange to me to have the one name in the nominativ and the other in the dative!

 

[ivj9]

The second is to have consistency with Lófótr and Ófótr. It seems strange to me to have the one name in the nominativ and the other in the dative!

You sent me down a hell of a rabbit-hole. Jesus.

Placenames are indeed not supposed to be written in dative-case in Old Norse (or modern Icelandic, for that matter). But the Wikipedia articles I found suggested the source of "Ofoten" to be Old Norse Ófóti. Swedish Wikipedia actually says it comes from Ófóti OR Ófótr. So apparently, Ófóti is attested..?

Attested or not, this is definitely all wrong, but not because of the dative-case. "Fóti" is actually NOT the dative for "fótr" (foot in English). The dative case in Old Norse uses a different front-vowel for the same word in the nominative case, thanks to this little thing called umlautization (same reason why plural for foot is *feet* in English). Before Old Norse (in proto-Germanic), this word used the same front-vowel in all forms.

In Old Norse, this is a particularly tricky vowel because it was alternately written three different ways (æ, œ, and ǿ). So the proper Old Norse dative for fótr should be written "fæti", "fœti", or "fǿti". The only way "fóti" might be correct would be if this were some kind of proto-Germanic remnant form, which is extremely unlikely given how far north this is.

I actually found a 19th century Norwegian who was puzzled by this as well. He traced "Ófóti" to a 15th century text, which is too late to be Old Norse.

So, my guess is that this is a 600+ year old misspelling. Someone must've seen "Ófǿti" (which is dative-case) written somewhere and mistakenly copied it as "Ófóti". Likely because they wanted to replace "ǿ" with something less archaic, and ended up using the wrong letter. This would later be carried on by Scandinavians who had already lost their case system, and with it the ability to recognize this error. And then it eventually found its way to Wikipedia articles...

So yeah, I second "Ófótr".

 

[Ölmestollen]

The locations in parts of central Sweden don't make much sense, and the names are often misplaced. Fryksdal in Värmland is in the wrong place, and Färnebo did not yet exist at the time. I have attached a map with a more historically accurate (although still simplified) division of Värmland based on the Hundreds of the 14th and 15th centuries, which differ from later divisions and their names. Note that Nordmark belonged to the province of Dalsland at the time (then just called Dal, as it still is in the local dialect). The raw materials of Värmlandsberg should probably be iron (although mining didn't really start there until the end of the 14th century), and the area around Vänern (especially Näs and Älvahärad) should be farmland, not definitely forests.

Grythyttan didn't really exist at the time, but was a part of Nora bergslag along with Hällefors (although the westernmost parts later belonged to Värmlandsberg). Nora bergslag was also a part of the province Närke at the time, not Västmanland. Idre should also not be a part of Dalarna, but rather of Hedmark in Norway, while Malung should strech further south and include Äppelbo. What is called "Orsa" on the map is actually Ore, while the actual parish of Orsa is a part of Mora, which it definitely should not be. Åmål in Dalsland should be Tösse or Tössbo, as Åmål was only an insignificant parish in Tössbo härad at the time.

There are certainly many other such mistakes, which should be corrected, but these are the ones that I noticed.