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

[Daniel the Finlander]

While I've been summoned back to this thread, I'd like to highlight the issue of Olofsborg location.

I've drawn a red line where the treaty of Nöteborg border is believed to have gone through. As you can see, it cuts right through the middle of the location, which is rather inconvenient. The circle is the rough location of Sulkava, which is believed to have been settled in the beginning of the millenium.

So the question is, what should the location's status be then? Should Sweden own it or not, and should it have finnish (savonian/karelian) pops alongside the sami who lived here during this period? I'm not sure frankly.

 

[Syres]

Still no Norwegian Iron?

"Arendalsfeltet"/"De Vesterlandske Gruver" on Agder region was by far the most important deposit for Norwegian Iron-works. From 1585 to 1975 over 70% of all iron ore was from the hundreds of small mines around Arendal. 2.4 million tonnes worth.

"«Gruberne i Arendalsfeltet spillede uden sammenligning den vigtigste rolle, idet disse gruber, som vi i det følgende skal omtale, leverede med rundt tal to trediedel af al den malm som verkene forbrugte.» Johan Vogt: De gamle norske jernverk , (s. 28)"


In addition, the Southern Norwegian coast is Oceanic climate. Yesterday we had almost 22C, the warmest in Norway! It's the Norwegian "sun coast", with best climate in the country (most sun and clear weather). Every year Agder competes with Jæren to deliver the first potatoes of the year. They will be served to the king by our national day 17. of May this year.

In general, a lot of the Norwegian coastal provinces should be Oceanic.

 

[Ipponen]

While I've been summoned back to this thread, I'd like to highlight the issue of Olofsborg location.

View attachment 1286705

I've drawn a red line where the treaty of Nöteborg border is believed to have gone through. As you can see, it cuts right through the middle of the location, which is rather inconvenient. The circle is the rough location of Sulkava, which is believed to have been settled in the beginning of the millenium.

So the question is, what should the location's status be then? Should Sweden own it or not, and should it have finnish (savonian/karelian) pops alongside the sami who lived here during this period? I'm not sure frankly.

According to savonhistoria.fi, when Olofsborg was built the Russians saw it as being built on their side of the border, which makes sense because the castle is situated on an island on the eastern side of the waterway that the border was drawn along. (https://savonhistoria.fi/vuoteen-1533/16-olavinlinnan-suojassa/)

Vastaus on kaksitahoinen. Linna ja siihen sijoitettu varusväki tarjosi kyllä turvaa vihollisen hyökkäystä vastaan ja saattoi pidättääkin rajan yli tapahtuvaa ryöstelyä. Mutta kuten varustautumisella usein, sillä oli myös vastatoimenpiteisiin yllyttävä vaikutus. Venäläiset katsoivat linnan rakennetuksi heille kuuluvalle alueelle. Savon erämaita koskevista rajariidoista tuli näin valtakuntien välisiä suhteita koskettava kysymys siitä, olivatko ruotsalaiset rikkoneet Pähkinäsaaren rauhansopimusta, joka kielsi linnojen rakentamisen Karjalaan.

Because of this it might make sense to have the western side of the location be part of Sweden, with some other name like Sulkava or Sääminki. The part of the location on the eastern side of the Nöteborg border could then be Olofsborg, and it would be uncolonized land at the start of the game. Of course for gameplay reasons the location being on the left side might be better, I can't really say.

 

[Hosumaija]

Notes on some (mainly Kven) locations

A not even nearly exhaustive list over names in Northern Fennoscandia that should be changed. The ones marked with '...' especially. Italic indicates a Sámi name and bold Meänkieli.

'Gellivaara' to Jiellevárri
Nikkaluokta to Nihkkáluokta
'Raunala' to Rounala
'Enontakis' to Eonadat
Abisko to Ábeskovvu
'Juckasjarvi' to Čohkkiras
Jokkmokk to Jåhkåmåhkke
Arjeplog to Árjepluovve
Kvikkjock to Gamájåhkå
'Socksjock' to Suoksjåhkå
'Muorionska' to Juŋgá
'Nunnanen' to Muoná

'Korpilombo' to either Soukolo or Korpilompolo
Kittilä should be changed to Gihttel if you keep Sámi as the majority culture.
Torneå to Tornio
Råneå to Rauna
Piteå to Piitime
Kiemi to Kemi
'Hienatiemi' to Hietaniemi
Gråtesk to Gråträsk or Jeärbmure
Bränna to Ylikainus or Pränni (I'm uncertain as to why it's called Bränna and not Överkalix however I am not acquainted specifically with Överkalix's history)
Bodebyn to Puuti or Suttes

This list is based both on my own knowledge as native to the area and variously Lantmäteriet, Wikipedia, and ISoF. It is probably not perfect.
It also assumes the counties' names should match the majority culture at game start.

Nearly a year since this huh! Welp, just budding in to add a bit. While personally I do find northern Fennoscandia to be kinda sparse location-wise I am admittedly biased so won't comment more on it. Following are some long explanations for why some locatoins should have different names:

Nikkaluokta whether called Nikkaluokta, Nihkkáluokta or Nikkulahti probably just shouldn't be called that. The area which the location covers is known in Meänkieli as Kaalasvuoma as the source lakes of the Kalix (Kaalas) river. While I don't know if there is a corresponding Sámi term for the region I would suggest Gálásjávri as the site and corresponding lake has been much more important historically for the region and would be much more appropriate a name. The name Nikkaluokta is first used around the year 1900 meanwhile Gálásjávri/Kaalasvuoma is present already from the very oldest documents available and settled permanently at the latest during the 1790s. See Åke Barck (2002) for example, I believe Erik Kuoksu also touches on the region when talking about the Upper Birkarl clans (especially Stålnacke (Teräsniska) and Olkkuri).

Naming Hietaniemi specifically Hietaniemi is perhaps a bit contentious. While the site was seemingly home to some fortifications during this era the name Hietaniemi specifically has only recently come to be used to refer to the village as a whole (replacing the earlier Koijukylä) and I'd be somewhat skeptical using it at this early time. Also present in the in-game province is the important trade site of Särkilahti (Swedish: Särkilax) which would also come to be the site of one of (if not the first?) churches in the region. Särkilahti ultimately lost its importance in 1615 when the church (and much of the rest of the town) was sent out to sea with the ice discharge, but if anything it makes it even more interesting, and the ice discharge could serve as an interesting mid/late game event. 1677 also had a famously brutal ice discharge for that matter.

Rauna (Råneå) should be renamed to Kainus (swe. Kalix). While I am not an expert on the history of either town, from what I do know it seems that at no point in history has Råneå been more important than Kalix. Kalix parish was established already in 1482 and by the 1660s (the time Råneå got its own parish) Kalix was already a notable town and even had its own copper mill where copperore from northern Sweden was refined.

Gråträsk which has a Kven majority at the time should be renamed to Jyränjärvi. Jyränjärvi is thought to be the original name for the town Jörn, which beyond being historically more important than Gråträsk (though having a shorter history as a Swedish settlement) it is more central to the actual in-game location.

Byske should be renamed to Kiiminki. Kiiminki is likely the original name of the small village which is now known as Kinnbäck. While some linguists (especially in older ones) have claimed that Kinnbäck is of Swedish origin, it seems very likely that it infact derives from finnish. See Edlund (1989). Considering the location is majority Kven at game start I would recommend it be renamed to this. While Kinnbäck isn't as important historically compared to Byske (and today especially is rather irrelevant), it was likely home to a Finnic population while modern Byske was as far as we know not, so I would suggest it to be the Kven name for the location.

Älvsby is the one location which I am really unsure what it could be called in Kven. The area doesn't really have any Finnic names which are clearly preserved or known as far as I am aware. Kantaberget and Kanisberget may be of Finnic origin, but really I am unsure. Historically Älvsbyn consisted of two villages Ytterbyn (The Outer Village) and Övrebyn (The Upper Village) which eventually merged into simply Byn (The Village) which eventually became known as Älvsbyn (The River Village). Considering the lack of preserved Finnic names in the area I would perhaps suggest the Kven name for the location be either Ylipiitime (Upper Pite [River]) or Kylä/Väyläkylä. Ylipiitime would probably be most realistically what the area might've been called, while Kylä/Väyläkylä are simply translations of the Swedish names Byn/Älvsbyn.


Might continue! Might not! This is some of what I wanted to say at least : )

P.S. Skellefteå and Umeå should have the names Heletti and Uumaja respectively if majority Kven. Might write another post on names like that!

 

[Bergenboy]

I wonder how it will be in game to change the capital seeing as control and market control is based on proximity from the capital and market capital. For Norway's case they really didn't have a proper capital before Copenhagen or Oslo in 1814. In the Middle Ages Norways monarch location fluctuated continuously between Nidaros, (Trondheim) Bjørgvin, (Bergen) Tunsberg (Tønsberg) and Oslo. Common misconception is that Bergen was the capital before Håkon Magnusson in 1314 (1299) moved it to Oslo. None of these are entirely true as the kings moved between these 4 main cities depending on the season and what issues where at hand. Håkon Håkonsson is credited with having Bergen as his capital while ruling Norway. Norway was at its peak expansion wise containing the Hebrides and the Isle of Man as well as the other western isle territories which is in 1337. There were huge distances between the isles of the west and mainland Norway so Bergen was the closest and most natural city for them to come to with their pleads and affairs. This western focus meant that Bergen became the most natural place for the king to be most of the time, as being in Oslo, Nidaros or Tunsberg were too far away from the focus and interest Norway had on the British Isles.

The shift of Håkon Magnusson to be most of the time in Oslo is also the shift in focus from the British Isles to Scandinavia (and partially Northern Germany). But he still moved around these 4 cities especially, and died in Tunsberg and not Oslo. The politics of Scandinavia had changed and Håkon Magnusson focused especially on fortifications on the eastern parts of the realm building Akerhus fortress in Oslo, and Båhus fortress on the border with Sweden.

I would like for a decision or an event or something like that will make you able to change the capital dynamically and maybe have some kind of flavor for Norway making you choose where to have your capital to focus on different aspects. Say for example you decide to have the capital remain in Oslo, this will make you focus on Scandinavian cooperation and expansion. If you pick your capital to be in Bergen you shift your national focus to be on the the Isles to the west such as the British Isles, Iceland Greenland and colonial expansion into Canada (Vinland) and beyond. Maybe get the Hebrides and Isle of Man back as Scotland has not payed what they agreed to for the Isles. If you would pick Nidaros maybe that would be focused on Northern Scandinavia and Northern Norway. Maybe it being a religious (theocratic) kind of playthrough fueled by Olaf the holy's religious fervor! Or it could be expansion into Bjarmeland and the White Sea, or both serving as religious expansion into Orthodox White Sea and Russia? For Tunsberg maybe a Denmark expansion focus playthrough? (Couldn't really come up with anything to tie this with besides that) I Think at least the capital being dead on set to Oslo is slightly wrong and if Norway would
be able to break free from the clutches of the Kalmar Union, I think this potential capital change would interesting and fun.
Norway didn't have a permanent capital (Norwegian)
Håkon Magnusson's shift from Western Isles towards Scandinavia (English)

 

[unmerged(80390)]

I see from the pictures on the Steam page that the London market is linked to Oslo. Shouldn't the trade be from Bergen? Most of the trade from Northern Norway and Western Norway into the international market went through Bergen (Stockfish, for example). The Hanseatic League had an office (Kontor) in Bergen. German merchants continued to run the trade in Bergen after the Hanseatic League was dissolved. After 1754, trade continued under the Norwegian leadership.

 

[Bergenboy]

I see from the pictures on the Steam page that the London market is linked to Oslo. Shouldn't the trade be from Bergen? Most of the trade from Northern Norway and Western Norway into the international market went through Bergen (Stockfish, for example). The Hanseatic League had an office (Kontor) in Bergen. German merchants continued to run the trade in Bergen after the Hanseatic League was dissolved. After 1754, trade continued under the Norwegian leadership.

I agree that the trade capital should be Bergen, and that should move the Faroe Islands, Shetland and Maybe Orkney towards that market. Most of the trade went through Bergen and this is more historically accurate throughout the entire gamespan.

Also The Building based country of the Hanseatic league should be in Bergen as it was one of the 4 kontors outside of Germany. All the other kontors of Novgorod, Bruges, (later Antwerpen) and London all have The Hansa in their locations except for Bergen which doesn’t make any sense as it was the place in which they had the most control especially after the black death. Maybe it will be an event during that time, but it definitely should be based in Bergen in 1337 as well.

 

[Bergenboy]

Don't know if someone already has written about this, but seems like norse has been reduced in Sweden, but has also appeared in Norway.

 

[Korsjan Rīkis]

Don't know if someone already has written about this, but seems like norse has been reduced in Sweden, but has also appeared in Norway.

View attachment 1294950

Still no Suomenusko pops in Estonia.

 

[Fulmen]

Finally found a single video from the early access wave with some footage from Sweden.

From the video one can tell that the borders in northern Finland are still based on the 1947 border, which is ahistorical and in my opinion ugly. This issue exists in more or less every PDX game released in the past 20 years. For EU5 I've written about it before e.g. here: https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/foru...une-2024-russia.1692158/page-25#post-29738333

For further information see also:
- https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/foru...-in-victoria-iiis-starting-scenario-s.1475178
- https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/foru...-still-has-this-anachronism-from-1947.1547759
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moscow_Armistice
- https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/ac/Map_of_Finnish_Petsamo.png

This is more or less where the borders should be:

This is from a map from the very early 20th century. While the border wasn't exactly like this throughout the centuries after the Treaty of Teusina (1595), it's a much better basis for the provincial/state borders than those of the Treaty of Paris (1947):

 

[StaunchSquire]

This is an amateur question/complaint but could it be possible to not use the term Scandinavia/n? Not for any offense reasons but because its from what I understand a relatively modern term that wasnt used during the vast majority of this games timespan. Having the language be called Scandinavian instead of something like Norse/Nordic or similar feels abit idk, artificial? As someone who loves old scandinavian languages and the like it would be much more immersive to give it a name that fits the era.

Since I assume there is already a formable called Scandinavia I have no wishes to change it really since uniting the three realms of Sweden, Norway and Denmark under a new name based in old roman/norse terminology makes perfect sense even if the word wouldnt be used for centuries irl.

I hope this is the right thread to post this in and good luck!

 

[StaunchSquire]

Also knowing what happened in the 19th century it doesnt make sense for Bohuslän not to have forests and not at least be somewhat hilly, which it very much still is today. It would also be cool to have Orust(Ordost back then) and Tjörn to be represented by an Ordost province that is an actual island.

After more thought I have some other things I would like to suggest to make Boshulän more interesting this time with names:

Currently from what I can tell its still divided into 3 one north one middle and one southern province of which I have some name suggestions to make it fit much better with the times, these are from a series of books called "Ortnamnen i Göteborg och Boshus Län" the numbers to the right of the names indicates when it was first dated to, I have trimmed down the names by alot to the ones I think look, sound and fit the best. I dont believe it makes much sense to call the top location Strömstad as it hadnt been founded and wasnt particularly important fora long time to come after the start date so that would be the most pressing "issue" for me here.
Top location:
Svarteborg/Skee

Skæiðiw 1325, Skeida 1380, Skeidi 1396

Swedish name:
Skede/Skee
/
Suartaborgh 1327-28, Suartoborg 1391, Suartuborga 1391, Swortoborgz Swortoborg 1417, Swartaborg 1456, Swartaborgh 1457, Sortenburg 1581(I think this one could fit as a danish specific name)

Swedish name:
Svarteborg
Middle location:
Oddewalle 1495, Oddewallæ 1497, Oddewald 1498, Oddewaldh 1508, Oddewall 1517, Oddevalle 1524

Swedish name:
Uddevalla

This is what I think in my subjective opinion the locations of Bohuslän should look like, here I think the shape of Bohuslän is much more pronounced and recognizable and it would be much more interesting to develop as it was very economically important as a part of Norway. I would still be happy if all that was taken from this is the name suggestions but having locations like these would fulfill my dream of playing an independent Bohuslän much more full-fulling.

Edit: "Bohus Län" should probably be renamed to Båhuslen/Bohuslen/Bohuslän if it can dynamically change name then Båhuslen(Norway), Baahuslen(Denmark) and Bohuslän(Sweden) but if only one can be ingame then any of "Båhuslen/Bohuslen/Bohuslän" would work even if slightly immersion breaking if its owned by the wrong country

 

[Fjellfyr]

So I have some thoughs when it comes to the area map, specifically the way norway is split.

Currently its some of the biggest areas in europe, with two areas: Nord-norge and syd-norge.

That they're big isn't inherently bad, and norway *did* have geographical split between Nordafjells and Sønnafjells.

Its just not the one pictured, because this is the modern usage and not the old usage. And I'm not referring to Møre and Romsdal, which are understandable to include, giving that sunnmøre and nordmøre traditionally have been considered vestlandet and trøndelag respectively and I assume we don't split up provinces to two areas.

This is the MODERN usage

This is the historical usage, and the one that was used for close to entire duration of the game

Though, if you want smaller areas and like norwegians of old realised nordafjells is very very big, this is also a historical viable alternative:

Though do make note that Vestafjells initially didn't have møre og romsdal from what I can gather and Østefjells initially was sørafjells with exception of agder.

 

[Erbeilas]

So I have some thoughs when it comes to the area map, specifically the way norway is split.

View attachment 1297723

Currently its some of the biggest areas in europe, with two areas: Nord-norge and syd-norge.

That they're big isn't inherently bad, and norway *did* have geographical split between Nordafjells and Sønnafjells.

Its just not the one pictured, because this is the modern usage and not the old usage. And I'm not referring to Møre and Romsdal, which are understandable to include, giving that sunnmøre and nordmøre traditionally have been considered vestlandet and trøndelag respectively and I assume we don't split up provinces to two areas.

This is the MODERN usage
View attachment 1297718

This is the historical usage, and the one that was used for close to entire duration of the game
View attachment 1297719View attachment 1297727

Though, if you want smaller areas and like norwegians of old realised nordafjells is very very big, this is also a historical viable alternative:

View attachment 1297722

I'd like to add as well that Värmland was considered part of Svealand until 1815. Even if it makes sense for gameplay purposes to have it in Svealand, I'd prefer to see it in Götaland, as that was what actually made sense to the people at the time. Not every country has an area division as clear as Sweden, so there's no problem in using it.

 

[TraditionalistLeo]

Even though it has been very long since this Tinto Maps came out, and I'm unsure whether it even makes any difference if I comment more information about Finnish history here, I'm doing it regardless because I'm bored yet so excited about EU5, and I don't know where else I would post this.

First I want to recommend adding this letter of protection to settlers as an event for Sweden into the game, since it was a decently important event that happened not long after the game start. (Incase it's not implemented already.)
It could represent better how the Pagan population shifted away as Catholicism slowly but surely expanded everywhere, and also how Swedish and Finnish settlers would become the majority culture in the Ostrobothnian coast, which would also lay the circumstances for the founding of many new cities such as Vaasa (which should obviously also be an event, for the early 17th century).

Now, I want to comment about minorities in the Finnish region. There have been many comments about Swedes being too prominent in Finland on the map shown here, which is correct, but do leave Swedish minorities in Finland-proper, Satakunta and Nyland. In this Finnish Wikipedia article it's clarified that Swedes migrated to the Nyland region beginning in the middle of the 13th century, so in 1337 they must have had a very good foothold.

The location of Porvoo, which you have put as majority-Finnish with a Swedish minority, should be Tavastian, infact it was one of the most important Tavastian market towns.
This is also the reason why there should be a minority of German burghers (probably Holsatians or Pomeranians, I'm not sure) there. According to the Finnish Wikipedia article about Porvoo's history (and don't mind me using Wikipedia as a source, since I've checked that the sources used in these articles are academic Finnish literature), Porvoo's early town center was called Saksala ("Town of Germans") due to German traders being active there. Porvoo got legislation in 1363, and it was stated that half of the mayors and city council were to be Germans, and the other half native burghers. Many Germans also immigrated to Porvoo (as well as other cities in Finland and probably in many other countries too) in the early modern period, so I hope that that's represented in the game somehow.

For Turku, Hanseatic trade was also very important. It is stated that in the 14th century 2/3 of the city's burghers were Germans, although later their share shrunk. This should be represented with a minority. Also, idk how accurately you're planning to represent historical buildings at the start of the game, but Turku in 1337 had atleast a cathedral, a cathedral school, six guilds, a castle, a marketplace and a dominican convent. Most of other Finland was pretty empty, but there were some buildings in other towns too, such as the castles in Hämeenlinna and Viipuri.

Back to the German minorities for once more, I think there should be German burghers in many Swedish cities too, but as a Finn I don't know much about those specifically. I just hope that these minorities will be represented in the game somehow.

 

[TraditionalistLeo]

Updated culture map

View attachment 1263899
View attachment 1263900

Changes:
- Finnish cultures on southern Ostrobothnian coast
- Sami in Storkyrö
- Tavastian in Fredrikshamn

I didn't merge finnish & tavastian cultures on these maps, as I feel like thats debatable. Not against it though, and it would be good as especially in Ostrobothnia there's a lot of mixing of tavastian and satakunta finns as you can see, making it kind of messy.

Edit:

View attachment 1263902

Here's how it would look like with finnish & tavastian merged into one culture.

I'm loving all these posts of yours, and I admire how accurate they mostly are. I just have to join in to talk about Tavastians and Kvens, as I feel like some people here don't really understand how they're different from Finns and Ostrobothnians.

My first important point is that Kvens are not Ostrobothnians. It's two completely different people. In this article the Finnish historian Jouko Vahtola explains that Kvens were basically Tavastians who moved into the vast, fertile lands of the northern coast of the Gulf of Bothnia. They grew subculturally independent from Tavastians and this is really well represented with having them as a Society of Pops. "Ostrobothnians" usually means basically the mix of Finns and Swedes who moved into the Ostrobothnian region in the early modern period. I hope that they are represented somehow in the game too, possibly via an event.

Tavastians and Finns are also arguably very much two different groups, and I'll show proof of that. Unlike Tavastians, Finns are way more ethnically mixed with previously Indoeuropean population but especially Baltic population. There was also a cultural difference, and Tavastians were largely talked about as their own group. In also contemporary sources, such as the clergy's letters and the Novgorod chronicles, Tavastians and Finns are highly regarded as different groups.

I'd also argue that Savonians came to exist in the 13th or 14th century, and they're basically the mix of Tavastians, Karelians and Sápmi. I don't have enough sources to be completely sure about anything exact though.

 

[Slime99]

Tavastians and Finns are very similar genetically.

As can be seen Tavastians, Satakuntans and Finns join together very tightly, and their closest populations after that are Southern and Central Ostrobothnians who descend from Tavastian and Finnish migrants northward.

https://academic.oup.com/g3journal/article/7/10/3459/6027487

Distinguishing them as separate cultures, while not wrong in some regards, is more of a matter of taste I think. In the second Wikipedia article both Finns Proper and Tavastians are mentioned as participants on the side of Swedes and Norwegians against Novgorodians and Karelians. In fact the theme of Karelians and Finns/Tavastians feuding with one another is a pretty common divisor in the time period, usually with the involvement of Novgorod and Sweden.

 

[Fulmen]

Distinguishing them as separate cultures, while not wrong in some regards, is more of a matter of taste I think.

It's inconsistent with how PDX portrays the Swedes, Norwegians, English, Russians and a number of other ethnicities ("cultures"). They're monolithic (or in the case of the Russians, relatively monolithic) but for "some reason" the Finns get split into seven different tribes, eight if you include the Veps. I've postulated before that it probably stems from PDX's decision to split Karelian off as an independent culture (this was done a few years after release in both EU4 and CK2, and recently in Victoria 3 as well). It wasn't a very consistent decision, so they took it a step further in EU5 and decided to split the Finns up even further. Of course the trouble with that is that it's still not consistent, both within the different Finnish groups represented now and in relation to the other culture groups in the game.

On a related note, interestingly according to some of the latest theories in the origins of the different Finnic regional groups, Karelians largely originate from Western Finns who pushed eastwards from Finland Proper and Tavastia and then mixed with other Finnic groups already in Karelia, rather than having come to the region through the Karelian Isthmus.

 

[Slime99]

It's inconsistent with how PDX portrays the Swedes, Norwegians, English, Russians and a number of other ethnicities ("cultures"). They're monolithic (or in the case of the Russians, relatively monolithic) but for "some reason" the Finns get split into seven different tribes, eight if you include the Veps. I've postulated before that it probably stems from PDX's decision to split Karelian off as an independent culture (this was done a few years after release in both EU4 and CK2, and recently in Victoria 3 as well). It wasn't a very consistent decision, so they took it a step further in EU5 and decided to split the Finns up even further. Of course the trouble with that is that it's still not consistent, both within the different Finnish groups represented now and in relation to the other culture groups in the game.

On a related note, interestingly according to some of the latest theories in the origins of the different Finnic regional groups, Karelians largely originate from Western Finns who pushed eastwards from Finland Proper and Tavastia and then mixed with other Finnic groups already in Karelia, rather than having come to the region through the Karelian Isthmus.

It is generally thought that North Finnic spread through Finland to Ladoga and beyond during the Iron Age.

Personally I would remove Kven, move Bjarmian to a more appropriate area, and unite Ingrian with Karelian. I am unsure if Vodians are represented but they could be their own culture. After that uniting Finns and Tavastians may work considering how similar they are in terms of material culture to one another. Savonians and Karelians being united would also make sense, although they would diverge more and more as time goes on.

 

[Nortrix]

Hello

Just wanted to address some things as a North Norwegian from Vesterålen/Lofoten.
Historically the region of Hålogaland.

It is many things so i will try to stay focused on one topic at a time relevant to this very promising game:

• Economic importance trough history:

Norway's fishing history goes all the way back to the Stone Age. The first immigrants to Norway discovered early on that there were rich deposits of fish, seals, small whales and seabirds off the coast. Fish established itself early on as an important resource for the population along the coast. During the 11th century, fish began to be traded domestically from Northern Norway and southwards. Around the 12th century, exports of dried cod and herring to England began. The basis for the growth of this trade was the cod fishery in Lofoten and the herring fishery in Northern Norway.

Sources from the 12th and 13th centuries, including Egil's Saga, show that stockfish was already a highly valued export product in the Iron Age, but perhaps also much earlier. Fish was the mainstay of the northern economy for many centuries and was traded for goods from all over the world. In the 14th century, stockfish accounted for over 80 percent of Norway's exports. King Håkon Håkonsson (1217-1263) granted Bergen a monopoly on trade from Northern Norway, and the city grew into one of Northern Europe's largest trading cities.
An amendment to the law in 1294 made it illegal for foreigners to sail north of Bergen to trade. The fishing farmers of northern Norway were thus required to sail south to Bergen to sell their fish there. This trade was organized so that the farmers had freight boats built for this purpose, and the fishermen farmers in the village were commissioned to operate them.
Stockfish was then transported on yachts from Northern Norway. By the end of the Middle Ages, there were more than 200 barges sailing between Northern Norway and Bergen. The Hanseatic League ruled the export market in 1300-1754 - after this, Norwegians took over.
Young boys and grown men left their homes in the late Christmas winter to sail to Lofoten to fish. The Lofoten fishery had to be prepared in every way, and the whole family was involved in the production of the contents of the Lofoten chests with wool underwear, mittens, wool socks, flatbread, stomp (raised bread) and other necessary provisions. The wife, the fisherman farmer herself, was left at home with responsibility for the care of the cows, the house, the food and the children, in addition to caring for the elderly. Everyday life was often characterized by fear and anxiety for those who were out at sea and who all too often never returned home. This is why stockfish is an important part of our cultural heritage.

Sources:

• Solhaug, Trygve: De norske fiskeriers historie 1815–1880, andre utgave, 1983, isbn 82-00-06824-2
• NOU 2019: 21. Framtidens fiskerikontroll.
• Norges fiskeri- og kysthistorie, bd. I-V, Bergen: Fagbokforlaget 2014.

• How this relates to the game?

Hopefully take notice of the regions historical importance. Could be implemented in the sense of a production bonus on fish. Like for example how it was done with Newfoundland in EU4.



I see already people have mentioned climate before me here. Oceanic and Artic climate is more about coastline and innland than North and South in Norway:

For example there can be Much colder winters in Oslo than Costal Northern Norway.

This is because of the warm sea currents from Mexico warming up costal Europe:

This comes to greater effect in the artic, keeping the seas ice free during winter. The Gulf Stream looses effect however passing eastwards along the region of Troms. That is why Finnmark is a significant colder costal region than for example Nordland. And also why Nordic bronze age peoples and later Norwegians avoided settling here in Larger numbers. Making it more available for the Sami and Finns who historically was less about maritime lifestyle in general and more innland focused.

Today and historically there has been a great divide in climate and population between the coastal and the innland of Northwestern Scandinavia. 99%of Norwegians lives close to the seas for this very reason. Oceanic climate for farming along the coast avoiding the deadly Siberian frost of the innlands.

Should not this be shown in the game? Little to no innland population compared to the more populated coastlines, harsh climate and death sentence to any large army?

Not speaking of Towns. People lived decentralized spread out, but close to all along the coast.
People today tend to look at centralization= value.

Can give a quick example against:
Tiny Island of Lovund northern Norway today. Population of 500 people. 11th biggest exporter of Salmon in the world (Nova Sea). 300 work for the company. Sales for around 2,7 billion Nok a year. 232 893 337,44 Euros.

The main value is to have something of demand. European cities wants fish. Then and now.

• How this relates to the game:

Make innland Populations in the north much smaller than coastal. Remove Artic climate from Nordland province and southwards. Because people here does not live in the artic innlands but the oceanic. coastal areas.

The reason why the map have thin stripes of oceanic along the coast is the mountains out in the sea:


Troms is a border region. Seems there should be something called subarctic climate.

Here finishing with some picture from Nordland as pictures tells more than thousand words:
Henningsvær Lofoten:

Nordfjord:

Replica beside the find of the world biggest Viking building. From 500AD-950AD. Borg Lofoten.