Tinto Maps #4 - 31th of May 2024 - Poland, Ruthenia, Baltic

[Ataleh]

You're joking right? Even today noone in Oświęcim "godo" (i.e speak with Silesian dialect/language) and Oświęcim is part of Lesser Poland Voivodeship (Województwo Małopolskie) and not Silesia Voivodeship (Województwo Śląskie), but not only administratively, but also if you look at "historical regions" the situation is exactly the same (by that I mean historical lands of Lesser Poland contains much more than modern Voivodeship of Lesser Poland)

Don't know about Oświęcim, but just north of it in Libiąż they "godoją". So even to this day there is cultural intermixing there.

 

[Teutonic_Knight_2000]

You're joking right? Even today noone in Oświęcim "godo" (i.e speak with Silesian dialect/language) and Oświęcim is part of Lesser Poland Voivodeship (Województwo Małopolskie) and not Silesia Voivodeship (Województwo Śląskie), but not only administratively, but also if you look at "historical regions" the situation is exactly the same (by that I mean historical lands of Lesser Poland contains much more than modern Voivodeship of Lesser Poland)

First of all, the correct spelling of this word in Silesian is: "Gŏdŏ". There was the Duchy of Oświęcim, which included Oświęcim, Zator (which was also a separate duchy), Żywiec and Wadowice. Due to the fact that it was the easternmost part of Silesia (the other Duchy of Siewierz had a similar situation), it was an area of mixing of Silesian, Moravian, Slovak and Polish (Lesser Poland) cultures. Either way, both the Duchy of Oświęcim and the Duchy of Siewierz fell away from Silesia centuries ago, which is why they do not have a Silesian identity today - which they could have had a long time ago in times of independence. Thus, half or even 3/4 of the inhabitants of Oświęcim and Żywiec locations may be of Silesian or Polish culture - it would be a zone of overlap between different cultures.

 

[ianwb]

Hi, I was talking to a friend of mine whose knowledgeable about culture stuff, and he gave me some input about the cultural map. (Knowing its a work in progress naturally)

-The Zemgalians (Between the Curonians, Selonians and Lithuanians (Samogitians & Aukstaitian), spoke an East Baltic language, not a West Baltic one

-The representation of cultures like the Cumans, Jasz and the division of Czech and Lithuanian, should, by extension, warrant the division of West Baltic into Pruthenian and Curonian (Skalvian might be too small to represent) - Yotvingian could be represented as well then

-Latvians emerged after centuries of Baltic German rule by the slow assimilation of Curonians, Zemgalians, Selonians and Latgalians, but also some Livs, generally though all the Baltic peoples under the Livonian Order, to each other

-If Latvian must be present at game start, it should at the very least cover all the East Baltic lands (make Zemgalia Latvian, not West Baltic); but then maybe Lithuanian should be merged too?

 

[pog67676767]

Because balts lived there way before names of the towns for example Lida (Lyda) is lithuanian, many rivers and names of variuos locations were lithuanian and many lithuanian surnames are mentioned in local mansions. For example in Lida at the start of XIX century the majority of population spoke lithuanian. And according to the polish historian Jerzy Ochmanski XVI century lithuanian language was spoken up to 50 km south of Lida. At least that's what I could find with a short google search without digging in to the actual historical literature. But basically there were way more balts living in the east of the current lithuanian territory

Lida as a city was generally considered to have been created in the 1380s by pagan lithuanians to defend against the Teutonic Order. The two other cities that I mentioned, Barysaw and Grodno were cities that were created by Ruthenians and were almost fully inhabited by lithuanians untill the era of polonization happened that is irrelevant to this start date. Grodno was created by the ruthenian dregovich tribe in the 12th century and Braslaw was created by Polotsk in the 11th Century. In general I find it wierd how Belarusian populations are unrepresented, specifically to the northern eastern side of what would be modern Lithuania and in game Eastern Poland.

 

[MiloMombasa]

Instead of Heiligenbeil (location south of Koenigsberg) I would suggest Balga, which was the centre of the Commandery of Balga and an important castle in the area.

Also Elbing played a very important role in the history of the region, being since the 16th century definitely way more important than Marienburg and in its Golden Age (late 16th - early 17th century) even more important for the Polish state than Danzig. Maybe split the location of Marienburg?

 

[Krajzen]

Previously I have criticized the notion of "Silesian" culture being strangely separate from "Polish" (imo either it should be Polish, or the entire Polish culture should be divided into regional subcultures, with Silesian and maybe? Kashubian being some of them) but there is one more thing I am uncertain about: lack of Polish/Kashubian culture in Pomerania (Gdańsk/Danzig) and Chełmno area southwards (Toruń/Thorn, Chełmno etc).

Maybe there is somebody more knowledgeable about this, but Gdańsk and the area southwards from it (up to Toruń/Thorn) was conquered by Teutons from Poland merely thirty years earlier, and Ostsiedlung here started at most a century earlier, so I find it very skeptical that there would be no Slavs here in 1337 AD. In particular, what's up with Western Baltic culture in Gdańsk?

Polish culture held out in the entire area well until the 19th century. The city of Gdańsk/Danzig had German majority since 14th century, but there has always been sizeable Polish minority in the city itself - even in the interwar period, after two centuries of Prussian persecution, Polish population estimates for Danzig go up to 15% (Encyklopedia Gdańska in 2012 estimated their number at 9-13%).
Polish majority peasant settlement in the immediate area held out all the way till 1918.

We also have sources that in the early 17th century in Słupsk/Stolp area the nobility spoke little German, had very active contacts with Poland (marriages, serving in Polish army, use of Polish - not just Kashubian - language etc) and the Prussian fight to eradicate Polish/ Kaszubian languages in Słupsk, Lębork and Bytów taking all the way till the second half of the 19th century. Słupsk was also the place of birth of Bogusław X the Great in 1454, the duke of Pomerania who married Anna Jagiellonka, Polish princess, planned personal union with Poland, a fostered cultural connections with PLC, so it's again the reminder that the area was not immediately swallowed by German settlers in political and cultural terms.

Sources:
*Ślaski K. (1948) „The history of Polishness in West Pomerania”
*Rymar E. (2005) "Lineage of Pomeranian dukes"
*Czarnik A., Lindmajer J. (1986) "The history of Słupsk"
*Śliwiński B., Mykowski J. (2012) "Gdańsk Encyclopedia"

 

[Darehus]

You write correctly, but looking at the map and the shape of the location boundaries, I see that Bochnia is located within the Wieliczka location. The location of Wieliczka looks like the current counties: Wieliczka, Bochnia and Brzesko in one. Tarnów is a location practically identical in terms of borders to the current Tarnów poviat (which, by the way, amuses me a bit). Therefore, changing the name of the location Tarnów to Bochnia would be geographically inappropriate. I would suggest removing salt from the Tarnów location and replacing it with something less valuable.But I agree about the name of the province. Wieliczka is a better fit than Tarnów.

Mea culpa, I had somehow messed up my borders and I thought Wieliczka was smaller and Tarnów bigger. Other then that however, fully agree with you, Salt should be removed from Tarnów and replaced (probably by livestock?), unless Tarnów would be renamed to Bochnia and borders adjusted to justify the salt being there.

NO. Tarnów was an important city, and Bochnia and Wieliczka were centers of salt mining, which were to be founded by Casimir the Great in later years.

The city of Wieliczka was granted the rights of a city in 1290, the City of Bochnia was granted the rights of a city in 1253. Tarnow was granted the rights of a city in 1330. Casimir the Great reign only began in 1333. The rock salt was first mined in Bochnia in 1248, whereas in Wieliczka it was 1252. Comperatively, Tarnów was less important then either Bochnia or Wieliczka, as for example it was not included in the Court of the Six Cities (Iudicium commissariorum sex civitatum), which was a high court for the cities that were started upon the German/Magdeburg law, which was established by Casimir the Great in 1356.

 

[Caracus]

Im assuming you only look for location namings right now that would fit their current country culture. So imma limit this to the German ones I saw for the Teutonic Order stuff:

Malbork -> Marienburg (better and more important than the marienburg you got in the livonian order
Lebork -> Lauenburg
Bydgoszcz -> Bromberg
Inowrocław -> Hohensalza (or Inowrazlaw till 1904) but I would suggest taking Hohensalza

 

[Kubqa2]

Too small and insignificant to be worth the performance hit due to pop fragmentation. Górale were most likely polish lesser poland serfs influenced by Walachian nomad shephards. Hill dwelling was more challenging so they formed somewhat different regional culture that was mostly rural and not political.

Actually I think "Górale" have majority at some areas near mountains, not only in Poland but also at todays Slovakia or at Bohemia border. Maybe they were not really political untill XX century but I would love to see them even as minority to make all Poland this amazing culture

 

[The Ciceronian]

Hi, when I heard a week ago that todays tinto map will combine not only the polish region itself but also baltics I was worried, but now seeing it consist of 4 regions (Poland, Baltics, Lithuania/Belarus, Ruthenia) I am terrified and somewhat sceptical about their future.
It was a very big mistake as each of those regions requaries huge amounts of information and data to be adequately represented and given justice in this time period.
Now I will start by saying that if you listen carefully to people intrested in providing sources and helping you flesh out this regions accordingly there is a hope that the results will be tolerable or even enjoyable. Don't listen to any yes-men and lapdogs becouse they will always be content with anything you present.

The polish provinces are a total mess. Sure they seem to resemble a samwhat vague understanding of what Poland was at that moment but the familiarity stops here.
Borders should strickly follow the interial administrative subdevision of polish state from this time period. The same devision that crystalize itself in XIV century and stayed roughly the same for 400 years. Sources for this devisons are easly accesable (some guy on the forum already made a thread about it) and there is no excuse why they weren't used at all. I'm not talking about spliting one province or another, but the whole map of Poland needs to be redrawn from scratch. It is a historic game and should feel historic and province/location borders are one of the most immersion setting aspects of the game as we will be looking at them for houndreds or thousands of hours.

Without doing it there is no sense in providing feedback regarding events/goods or even vegatation/terrain as it will be like painting with fine paints on a bad canvas. You guys said that with this project your mission is portraying all parts of the world accordingly without wester european bias. I hope it was genuine and not a virtue signalling. The same logic applies to other regions from todays tinto talk and there is alrady an ongoing discussion regarding livonian order wich was also poorly represented. I was vary suprised and let down when I heard that the person responsible for this mess is Johan himself. This could mean that from the developer team perspective eastern europe is not considered worthy of proper represantation and half measures are more then sufficient. I hope I am wrong.

To not end on a bad note and to add some credibility to my post I will provide with a beautiful map of the polish state from the Cartography Institute of E. Romer.
View attachment mapa i rp.jpg

 

[Vlamir]

Hello, heard that devs are open for suggestions and i have some if you want be more historical accurate in 1337

1) In 1337 war between Poland Teutons and Czechs was in truce, not active. Furthermore thanks to diplomacy Czechia was already in peace with Poland.

2) There were some independent Silesian princedoms:
-Świdnica
-Jawor
-Nysa (should be renamed for Grodków prov)
-Ziębice ( likewise for Ząbkowice Śląskie)
Furthermore prince of Świdnica was Polish ally and nephew to polish king.
- Ścinawa for Wołów. It was Czech vassal princedom.

3) Other renaming suggestions for Silesia:
- Rybnik renamed for Racibórz
- Racibórz is in wrong place, in that place should be Olesno or Kluczbork
- also there should be Czech vassal state of Strzelce on the east from Opole and Niemodlin Czech vassal on the South west of Opole
- Wrocław was already a Czech king possesion, also Głogów in half

4) North Kuyavia princes:
There were 3 princedoms:
Dobrzyń
Bydgoszcz
Gniewkowo

Inowrocław was already in king domain.

Furthermore Polish king temporarly granted himself Bydgoszcz and Dobrzyń areas for himself for war with Teutons reason. In compensation prince of Bydgoszcz took Sieradz and Dobrzyń prince took Łęczyca.

Historicly when peace with Teutons were signed prince of Bydgoszcz or Sieradz died already, but duke of Dobrzyń granted back Dobrzyń and has right to rule over Łęczyca until jis death.

4) Some other name changes suggestion:

- Chęciny for Kielce. During medieval tines Chęciny was more important. Kazimierz III build there a castle

- Wiślica for Busko Zdrój. Wiślica was old center even in pre-Piast period, it was even for some time princedom, Kazimierz III in Wiślica issued a written law codex for Lesser Poland

- Nakło in and Sępolno for Wyrzysk and Flatow. Nakło in South, Wyrzysk in north

- Łomża was important town so suggest to place in Ostrołęka, but Ostrołęka place in Przasnyrz.

- Nowy Targ for Zakopane. Zakopane became a city in late 19th century.
(Edit: even better to name Podhale)

- province on the east of Drawsko which can't read name - Wałcz, and at that time should be in Brandenburg possesion. Poland gained Wałcz in late 60-ties 14th century.

- Bielsk Podlaski rename to Drohiczyn, important city in medieval Podlasie area, place where Daniel of Halich was crowned king of Ruthenia

- there's no province for Olsztyn and Elbląg cities

- rename Grójec to Czersk and Czersk to Warszawa - shortly after start date Warsaw was a place where papal envoys took court between Poland and Teutons

Hope was helpfull

 

[FreeLancer8A]

Novgorodian and Severian cultures are not real things. No idea what they are supposed to represent.

Novgorodian represents the very much real Old Novgorodian dialects previously spoken in North Russia, possibly extending to Pskov as shown here, which had both preserved and innovated unique features not found in other Slavic languages.

Severian... well... It is based on the name of a real tribe, and it could (emphasis on could) represent South Russian dialects (though then I would start questioning the fact that Belarusian doesn't exist from the start even more, plus the cultural borders may disprove this in the future). I suppose that one is moreso to have some fragmentation of Russian

 

[NarcomancerPL]

First of all, the correct spelling of this word in Silesian is: "Gŏdŏ". There was the Duchy of Oświęcim, which included Oświęcim, Zator (which was also a separate duchy), Żywiec and Wadowice. Due to the fact that it was the easternmost part of Silesia (the other Duchy of Siewierz had a similar situation), it was an area of mixing of Silesian, Moravian, Slovak and Polish (Lesser Poland) cultures. Either way, both the Duchy of Oświęcim and the Duchy of Siewierz fell away from Silesia centuries ago, which is why they do not have a Silesian identity today - which they could have had a long time ago in times of independence. Thus, half or even 3/4 of the inhabitants of Oświęcim and Żywiec locations may be of Silesian or Polish culture - it would be a zone of overlap between different cultures.

Mate I'm not silesian. What are you mambling about is not true. Yes intermixing that did happen, but Oświęcim, Zator, Żywiec and Wadowice never were part of historical region of Silesia (their history was tied to Silesia, but never were a part of this historical region).
You know why I know it? I'm from there. It doesn't make sense to make them Silesian, because they returned to Poland before the Silesian identity begun to form. If you want Silesian culture (which is not really accurate at this point, but it can be more or less sucessfully argued for) it still doesn't make sense to make Oświęcim (representing on the map all 4 of them) Silesian

 

[Anonim97]

It is a tad bit hard to pinpoint the exact place it should take on the map, but right above Kalisz region there is a „Puszcza Pyzdrska” – a massive wild forest, historically being uninhabited up until the XVII century because of marshes and general hostility of this area. Seems a bit silly, if understandable, to not have any representation of this area on–map.

There is also Białowieża Forest - the last and the largest remaining part of the immense primeval forest between Grodno and Bresta. But I think it has been represented by this part already

Also regarding Sudeten mountains I mentioned earlier - here found this hipsometric map of Poland - https://www.labgis.pl/hipso/#9/51.1173/16.1884

It's not as good as the official ones on Geoportal.gov.pl, but it is much easier to read and navigate. This example I link here shows the elevation in the Legnica-Jawor region that is present on the Tinto map.

 

[lineal2018]

Hi all!
This is my first post here, but I feel like some thoughts should be add to discussion.
I very like the idea of EU5 map being post to criticism before game start.

Personally i live in Nowy Sącz area in Poland, so I will add most of my knowledge about this region.

1. Elevations:

The biggest mistakes I see are flatlands in Southern Poland:

From the map you can see locatations (Myślenice, Nowy Sącz, Jasło, Krosno, Sanok, Lesko) should be definitely "Hills". Other locations (Kraków, Tarnów, Dębica, Rzeszów, Przemyśl) are partly hills so I would leave them as they are presented now.

Also I would maybe (I am not sure) consider locations between Kraków and Częstochowa (Chrzanów, Bedzin, Miechów) as "Hills" (although elevations there is not so high as in areas mentioned earlier). You have given Oświęcim location "Hills" elevation thought Oświęcim city itself is on flatland near Vistula river (I guess because you considered mountains in south of this location). Maybe better option would be to change locations borders and give some more terrain to Żywiec, Myślenice and Zakopane location - this way you will be able to change Oświęcim to "Flatland".

The other region where you may add some Hills in Kielce area. I think Kielce locations may be presented as "Hills". Other locations looking at map seems more as flatlands so I will leave them as they are presented now.

2. Cultures:

I wrote my thought on map (and divided cultures of Nowy Sącz location).

I have seen some talk about cultures in south Poland Carpathian region.
I will speak for Nowy Sącz location - as you can see Nowy Sącz location in the game will be roughly the same as in administrative division of current Poland.
There are 4 cultures of that area:
- Polish Lachy Sądeckie - majority of Population
- Polish Pogórzanie (less known by me culture - not sure how Polish this culture is) - minority in this location.
- Gorals/Górale - I am mostly blood descendant of this culture - living is less inhabitable mountainous areas - minority in this location.
- Rusyn/Rusini/Lemkos/Łemkowie - I have some ancestors from that culture - living is less inhabitable mountainous areas - minority in this location.

So definitely majority culture of Nowy Sącz location should be Polish. You could add Gorals and Rusyn/Lemkos as minority if you like.

I am not sure Gorals should be add as new culture - they are majority only in 2 locations in Poland - Zakopane and Żywiec + minority in Tesin, Oświęcim, Myślenice and Nowy Sącz. Do not know how they spread in Slovakia area though. Btw - I have seen someone wrongly putting Gorals to Jasło location - there are no Gorals there.

About Lemkos - it will be easier to consider them as part of Rusyn culture.

About locations east to Nowy Sącz - looking at map I found the culture of provinces should be:
Jasło - Polish majority, Rusyn minority
Krosno - Polish majority, Rusyn minority
Sanok - Rusyn majority, Polish minority - or half half
Lesko - Rusyn majority, Polish minority

3. Tarnów location should be named Tarnów - there is no Bochnia city inside location looking at location area.

4. Is there any evidence Poland was at war at the start date? From what I know Teutons with some help from Czechia fighted with Lithuanians alone.

 

[Gronello]

First things first, Hungary also took part in this war on Polish side, but...

...I'm not sure if Poland really should be at war with teutons. Theoretically they were in conflict, but since 1332; After the death of Casimir Elbow-high no combat operations took place. Instead, congresses (Vysehrad) and papal trials were conducted. The most important things were: the renunciation of the title of King of Poland by the Czech ruler, Polish-Hungarian PU after the death of Casimir the great, Galician-Ruthenian PU with Poles and returning of Kuyavia (final peace treaty of Kalish (1343)).

Sources (in polish):

Marian Biskup, Wojny Polski z Zakonem Krzyżackim, Wydawnictwo Napoleon V, Oświęcim 2014, page 35

Jerzy L. Wyrozumski, Kazimierz Wielki, Wrocław 2004;

Wielka historia Polski pod red. Stanisława Grodzieńskiego, t. I, cz. II Dzieje Polski piastowskiej (VIII w.-1370), Kraków 2003.

 

[Vlamir]

Here' s mine renaming suggestions:
1) Chęciny instead Kielce
2) Racibórz instead Cieszyn(Tesin)
3) Łomża instead Wizna
4) Radom instead Kozienice
5) Podlasie instead Białystok
6) Opava should be in Silesian macroregion, not Moravian
7)Sieradz instead Pajęczno
8) Kujawy instead Inowrocław, which also should include Włocławek region
9) Dobrzyń region instead Lipno, and shouldn't have terrain on the other side of Wisła River
10) Płock instead Ciechanów and Rawa instead Płock
11) Memel instead Ragnitz

Next one are my subjective visual fixes
12) Pułtusk region sholud be eliminated
13) Tarnów and Nowy Sącz should be one
14) Sandomierz, Kielce and Kozienice should be one

 

[Anton2181]

1. Bohemia signed a peace treaty with Poland in 1335 so they should be out of the war by game start (First Congress of Visegrad, Bohemia recognized the Polish claims)
2. No hostilities were actually waged between the game start and the historical peace, will there be some sort of an event to get the historical deal? I fear the AI will otherwise always rapidly swing in one direction or the other instead of the historical status quo. I would even go so far as to propose Poland starts at peace and only later has an option to either secure the historical deal or re-escalate into the war.
3. Will there be an event covering the Second Congress of Visegrad that set up an inheritance deal between Poland and Galicia (Poland would inherit Galicia if Duke Jerzy died heirless) and Poland and Hungary?

 

[Stachwel]

Previously I have criticized the notion of "Silesian" culture being strangely separate from "Polish" (imo either it should be Polish, or the entire Polish culture should be divided into regional subcultures, with Silesian and maybe? Kashubian being some of them) but there is one more thing I am uncertain about: lack of Polish/Kashubian culture in Pomerania (Gdańsk/Danzig) and Chełmno area southwards (Toruń/Thorn, Chełmno etc).

Maybe there is somebody more knowledgeable about this, but Gdańsk and the area southwards from it (up to Toruń/Thorn) was conquered by Teutons from Poland merely thirty years earlier, and Ostsiedlung here started at most a century earlier, so I find it very skeptical that there would be no Slavs here in 1337 AD. In particular, what's up with Western Baltic culture in Gdańsk?

Polish culture held out in the entire area well until the 19th century. The city of Gdańsk/Danzig had German majority since 14th century, but there has always been sizeable Polish minority in the city itself - even in the interwar period, after two centuries of Prussian persecution, Polish population estimates for Danzig go up to 15% (Encyklopedia Gdańska in 2012 estimated their number at 9-13%).
Polish majority peasant settlement in the immediate area held out all the way till 1918.

We also have sources that in the early 17th century in Słupsk/Stolp area the nobility spoke little German, had very active contacts with Poland (marriages, serving in Polish army, use of Polish - not just Kashubian - language etc) and the Prussian fight to eradicate Polish/ Kaszubian languages in Słupsk, Lębork and Bytów taking all the way till the second half of the 19th century. Słupsk was also the place of birth of Bogusław X the Great in 1454, the duke of Pomerania who married Anna Jagiellonka, Polish princess, planned personal union with Poland, a fostered cultural connections with PLC, so it's again the reminder that the area was not immediately swallowed by German settlers in political and cultural terms.

Sources:
*Ślaski K. (1948) „The history of Polishness in West Pomerania”
*Rymar E. (2005) "Lineage of Pomeranian dukes"
*Czarnik A., Lindmajer J. (1986) "The history of Słupsk"
*Śliwiński B., Mykowski J. (2012) "Gdańsk Encyclopedia"

As for Gdańsk - During Teutonic conquest, the city was completely destroyed and population massacred, and it was rebuilt by new German settlers. In this context, 30 years of Teutonic control are actually a reason against depicting a sizeable Polish population in the city, Poles only started settling in it again after some time. As for West Baltic culture in the city, I assume that's just a mistake and it was supposed to be Prussian (German one).

Kashubian culture and language on the other hand, are a more complicated matter. To put it simply, Kashubian was not yet a written language and Polish was the most similar to spoken Kashubian (First written records of Kashubian are Polish texts that include individual Kashubian words). Language with more literary traditions and significance always takes the precedence among the elites, but not among illiterate general population.

The most fundamental difference between Kashubian and Silesian in relation to Polish is that Kashubian language was already different from Polish since at least 10th century (as Pomeranian language), while Silesian started forming at the earliest in the 16th. And this marks first significant differences, not when they started sounding funny.

 

[Xevispl]

Does Poland has Silesia as their core land? In 1337 just 1-10 years ago Czechia vassalised most Silesian duchies in the name of king of Poland, also Casimir III renounced (but not quite) his cores to Silesia in 1339 in Vysehrad, so after starting date.