• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.

Tinto Maps #6 - 14th of June 2024 - Great Britain & Ireland

Hello everyone. @Pavía and the rest of the Content Design team are busy working on the feedback for the previous Tinto Maps, so I'm standing in for this week.

I'm @SaintDaveUK, some of you might have seen me here and there on the forums, but the long story short is that I work on a very secret game whose name I am contractually obligated to redact. That's right, it's ███████ ██████!

This week you get a double-whammy, mostly because it’s really hard to show Britain on its own on a screenshot. Partly to side-step the “British Isles” naming controversy, but mainly because the gameplay of them both is so different, this part of Europa is divided into 2 distinct regions: Great Britain and Ireland.

Climate​

The mild Oceanic climate (Köppen Cfb) dominates the isles. Where it cools towards the inland Pennines and the Scottish Highlands (Köppen Cfc), we represent it with the wintry and dreich Continental climate.

climate.jpg




Topography​

The isles are dominated by green and pleasant flatlands and low rolling hills, the peripheries punctuated by rocky mountains and craggy highlands.

We would like to add some more impassable locations in northern England and the Scottish borders to make manoeuvres a little more interesting and strategic, but would like suggestions from people more familiar with the Pennines.

[Edit: 16 June added the missing map]

topography.JPG


Vegetation​

The great moors, bogs, and fens are represented by Sparse vegetation, meanwhile much of the land is still wooded.

vegetation.jpg




Raw Materials​

The raw goods situation aims to reflect the economic reality of medieval Britain. Shepherding was common on every corner of the islands, a lot of the wool produced was sold to the industrial hub of the Low Countries to be manufactured into cloth, which was in turn sold back to British markets.

The further north-west we go, the less fertile the terrain, and as such the greater reliance on pastoral farming such as livestock over wheat. The western hills and valleys also expose a greater number of mineral delights, including the historic stannary mines of Devon and Cornwall.

raw_materials.jpg




Markets​

As you can see the two starting markets are London and Dublin. Aside from London we could have chosen almost any town, from Aberdeen to Bristol. We chose Dublin as it was the main trade centre in Ireland, and also because it handsomely splits the isles to the East and West of the Pennines, demonstrating the impact that terrain can have on dynamic Market attraction.

They are both shades of red because they are coloured after the market centre’s top overlord country – market control is a viable playstyle and we like to think of it as a form of map painting for countries not focused on traditional conquest routes.

market.jpg




Culture​

We have decided to go with a monolithic English culture. We could have forced the introduction of a second Northumbrian or even third Mercian culture, but typically they were not really considered separate peoples. The English, though diverse in origin and with a variety of dialects, had already begun to coalesce in the face of the Viking invasions hundreds of years before.

Scotland, conversely, is a real porridge of cultures. The Lowland Scots (who speak a dialect of Northumbrian English that later develops into the Scots language) dominate their kingdom from their wealthy burghs, and are gradually encroaching onto the pastoral lands of the Gaelic Highlanders. The Norse-Gaelic clansmen watch from the Western Isles, with some old settlements remaining around Galloway. The far north, ironically called Sutherland, retains some Norse presence.

Wales, conquered for around a century by this point, plays host to English burghers looking to make a few quid, as well as the descendants of Norman adventurer knights in the marcher lordships, but is still majority Welsh-speaking from Anglesey to Cardiff.

The Anglo-Irish (representing the spectrum from Cambro-Norman knights to the so-called ‘Old English’ settlers) live in great numbers in the south-eastern trading towns from Dublin to Cork, as well as in smaller numbers in frontier outposts.

The cosmopolitan towns across the isles are also home to people from elsewhere in Europe, most notably Flemish weavers from the Low Countries, though their numbers are too small to impact the mapmode.

The Norman ███████ dominates as the ██████████████ for both of the kingdoms and their subjects. The conquest of 1066 is no longer fresh, but the continuing bonds between the aristocratic classes of England, Scotland, and France have kept the French language alive and strong.

culture.jpg






Religion​

I decided that it's not even worth taking a screenshot of the Religion map mode. There are tiny minorities of Jewish people in some Scottish and Irish towns (they had been expelled from England), but they are so small in number they don't even register on the map mode

Other than that, it's all Catholic. But not for long.

> John Wycliffe has entered the chat.


Areas​

Based on the 4 provinces of Ireland (sorry Meath) and splitting England roughly into the larger Anglo-Saxon earldoms which have some similarity with the modern Regions (sorry Yorkshire).

areas.jpg





Provinces​

We have fixed the colours of the Provinces mapmode so you can see the individual provinces a bit more clearly. These are largely based on the historic counties, which have remained fairly constant throughout history, while merging some of those that are too small.

We’ve almost certainly offended someone.

The ancient Scottish shires are pretty messy and difficult to coalesce into neat provinces, so any suggestions for better arrangement there would be very welcome.

provinces.jpg




Locations​


You might notice that the locations in Ireland are varyingly written in both English and in Irish. This is because we have the new system up-and-running where we can name Locations by the primary culture of the country they are owned by.

This means that for example London might be called Londres if it was ruled by a Catalan country. It’s currently a WIP feature and we might add more elements, such as a game setting to base the name on dominant culture of the location instead, or to just use default (English) names.

locations.jpg




Government Types​

As with most of Europe, most of the countries are under some monarchy or another, but the Irish tuathas begin with the Tribe government type. This, among other mechanics such as [redacted] helps to give them a very unique playing style in Europe.

government.jpg


Countries​

England

England of course stands as the dominant kingdom in the isles. Despite having a lot of power resting on the barons, the country is fairly unitary even at this point, with very little practical separation between the crown’s power in somewhere like Kent versus Yorkshire. However there are notable exceptions.

The powerful Burgesses estate in the City of London enjoys ancient freedoms from royal power, while the king peers in from the Crown’s seat of power in neighbouring Westminster.

The County Palatine of Durham is not represented by a country, but buildings that give the Clergy Estate a huge amount of power in the locations it is present in. This also ties into political gameplay as a ██████████ ██████.

The newly created Duchy of Cornwall—the only duchy in England at the time—would also not be represented well by the Cornwall country, being a disparate set of manorial holdings that are ironically mostly in Devon. Cornwall of course exists as a releasable country though.

The Isle of Man is a little less certain. For now we have it as a subject of England. On paper it was a ‘kingdom’ awarded to William Montagu, the king’s favourite, however we aren’t sure if he actually wielded any real power on the isle. It changed hands between England and Scotland numerous times in this period, but in practice it appears to have been governed by a local council of barons. Any more details on exactly what was going on here in this period would be greatly appreciated.

These decisions have been made because as England heaves itself out of the feudal system, we thought it would be best if the small-fry inward-looking internal politicking is handled through the Estates and [redacted] systems, and then the diplomacy tracks are freed up for the English player to behave more outwardly against other major countries.

Wales

Though subjugated by conquest, Wales was not formally annexed into the Kingdom of England until the mid 1500s. As such the principality begins as a Dominion subject under England.

Those familiar with Welsh history will note that historically the Principality of Wales didn’t extend much beyond the old kingdom of Gywnedd. Much of the country to the southeast was in fact ruled by marcher lords, which we represent with a powerful Nobility estate in the valleys and beyond.

There is an alternative vision of Wales that I would like to gauge opinion on, and that is expanding it to include the Earldom of Chester and the marches on the English side of the modern border. If you are an Englishman familiar with modern borders this might look alarming, but these lands were also constitutionally ambiguous parts of the “Welsh Marches” until the 1500s. This will hand over to the Wales player the full responsibility of dealing with the marcher lords, allowing England to focus on bigger picture issues like beating France.

Ireland

Ireland is going through a moment of change. English royal power is centred on the Lordship of the Pale, the king’s Dominion ruling out of Dublin Castle. However, it struggles to keep a grasp on the rebellious Hiberno-Norman earls scattered around the island - some of whom remain as vassals, some of whom have managed to slip free of royal control.

The Tanistry system of succession endemic to the Gaelic Irish has its advantages, but it can also lead to chaotic feuds between rival branches. The so-called Burke Civil War has fractured the powerful Earldom of Ulster into rival Burke cousins who jealously feud over their shrinking lordships in Connaught. Native Irish princes of the north have reconquered most of their own lands from the de Burghs, but there are also two rival O’Neill cousins who style themselves King of Tyrone either side of the River Bann.

The feuding Irish lack a unifying figure, but anyone powerful enough could theoretically claim the title of High King. The former provincial kingdoms, such as Meath and Connacht, enjoy the elevated rank of Duchy, giving them a slight edge in the High Kingship selection.

Scotland

The chancer Edward Balliol continues his attempt for the Scottish throne, with England’s tacit permission. It’s hard to determine the exact lands held by Balliol in 1337, but we know his disinherited loyalists hold the castle of Perth while his English allies had seized large tracts of the lowlands from Bruce. Balliol has also bought the loyalty of the MacDonald and the other Hebridean galley lords by granting them remote land on the west coast of the mainland.

Meanwhile, Scotland’s canny regent Sir Andrew de Moray launches his decisive counterattack as his true king, David II de Bruce, waits in exile in France.

political.jpg


Dynasties​

We know about Plantagenet, Balliol, and Bruce, so I've zoomed in on Ireland to show the ruling dynasties of the various chieftains and earls.

dynasty.jpg


Population​

Excuse the seams and the greyscale mapmode. We have something better in the pipeline...

population_country.jpg
population_location.jpg




Well, thats it for now!

As always the team is eagerly awaiting your feedback and looking forward to the discussions. We’ll try to keep on top of the thread, but we have a teambuilding activity this afternoon so it might be a little more sporadic than usual!

Next week: Anatolia!
 
Last edited:
  • 221Like
  • 100Love
  • 7
  • 7
  • 1
Reactions:
I thought that I should read other people's comments before posting my own. I got through 20 pages only to find this thread has now reached 37 pages and the map has been updated, so that's the last time I try to do that! Apologies if I duplicate things. My comments are based on the updated locations map.

Looking at the topography map, I am surprised that the Wells location isn't Marshes. There were small-scale efforts to drain the Somerset Levels by the 14th century, but the main effort wasn't until the 17th and 18th centuries.
Mr Welshy, every single location in Great Britain has a Welsh language variant, they just aren't shown in 1337 as Wales starts with English primary culture. Happy reconquests!
This is absolutely fantastic; diolch for putting the effort into this. I often enjoy leading a Welsh revival in CK2 and CK3 so I hope to put these in use one day.
The borders of the Middlesex province seem very similar to those of modern Greater London. Might it be more historical to remove Southwark from Middlesex and Guildford from Sussex to create a Surrey province?
As other posts have said, I do worry that you are setting a trap for yourself by separating Westminster from London and making it the capital of England.
Similarly I think during this time period Salford would be the major city in Southern Lancashire and not Manchester, which became the main city during the industrial revolution too. Almost all old maps of Lancashire that I've seen have that area marked as the Salford Hundred.
I see that the Manchester Location has been renamed Salford on the latest map. I understand why this was suggested, because Salford Hundred was a significant administrative area with its own courts. It's tricky because in the 13th century the two towns were similar in size, but the 14th century is exactly when the textile boom turned Manchester into a much bigger place. There's a famous mural by Ford Madox Brown in Manchester Town Hall that dates the arrival of Flemish weavers to precisely 1363, but AFAIK that date is poetic licence and it could be any date after Philippa of Hainault became Queen of England in 1328. I guess it depends on whether you are aiming to represent the status quo in 1337 (equal towns but Salford was the name of the wider area) or the bulk of the Project Caesar time period (when Manchester was the economic engine of all Lancashire).
Should Crewe really exist as a location at this point? I thought it only gained significance during the industrial revolution as a major railway hub. Surely neighbouring Nantwich is more fitting as a market town?
Crewe is another railway town that was of no importance during this period. Nantwich is the best name to use there. Also, salt might be a better good there.
I am pleased that Crewe has rightly been changed to Nantwich, for the reason given. The "wich" in Nantwich probably means "a place where salt is mined" and the industry existed as far back as Roman times and was thriving at the time of the Domesday Book. You might want to expand this Location slightly northwards, so that it includes the salt towns of Middlewich and Northwich in mid- Cheshire. Middlewich alone has a whole Wikipedia article discussing the historical salt industry and possibly had higher production than Nantwich in 1337. While there is only one salt mine left today (in nearby Winsford), that history is still felt today, because in the 19th century the salt was brought down the Weaver to be turned into chemicals in Halton, which led to major investment by firms like ICI in the 20th century, which is why today Cheshire has several high-tech industries giving it the highest productivity in the North of England. So please add the salt to start all this off.

Staying with Cheshire, I see that it's been placed in the Midlands Area. From an economic point of view, it should be in the Northumbria Area. Cheshire's rivers flow north, not south, and so its economy has always been linked to Lancashire. The line of low hills along the border between Cheshire and Staffordshire, forming the watershed between the Mersey and Trent basins, are a better place to put that boundary. However, you have talked about adding Marcher mechanics, which should definitely apply to Cheshire if they exist, so those political considerations might be more important. I will try to write another post on that if I get more time.

I'm also familiar with Anglesey, in fact I crossed the Menai suspension bridge just last year

While you are correct that Anglesey is an island, at its narrowest point the Menai strait is only about 10m deep and 300m wide. I don't think you could sail a warship up it. As such it's represented as a river, as its strategic attributes are much more akin to a wide river than a coastal sea.
Well, the Solent between Isle of Wight and the mainland is 5km of open sea, over 100m deep. The gameplay implication of a strait is that a warship can block army movement, which IMO isn't the case on Menai
The reason the Britannia Bridge (the railway bridge over the Menai Sttait) is so high was that the Admiralty required that warships (which in 1845 still often had sails) should still be able to use the strait after the bridge was built. If it was a naval necessity in the 19th century, then it must have been possible to sail a medieval warship through the strait. Also, the centre of the Kingdom of Gwynedd was mostly at Aberffraw on Anglesey. I think that was mainly for economic reasons (the flatlands of Anglesey produced more taxable surplus than the mountains of Great Britain) but I've always wondered whether the protection offered by the Menai Strait was another reason for it.

I feel like Bedfordshire should be Berkshire, as it's probably the more "significant" county in that area (it contains Windsor, and therefore Windsor Castle).

Possible I'm slightly biased as it's where I live.
I'd split Hertford into at least 2 locations, with St albans being in the West, and Hertford being in the East.
Rename Kesteven to Stamford
Reading Should be a separate location, with parts of Oxford and Windsor.
I'm putting all my suggestions in this message and will edit it when I have a new one:
Locations:
Take the south Kesteven and part of Rutland, and add a Stamford Location
Rename the remaining part of Kesteven to Grantham
Split Hertford into 2, with the West being St Albans, and the East remaining Hertford
Add a separate location for Ely, taking parts of Peterborough and Cambridge
Add a separate location for Reading, and if possible, also Newbury.
Add a separate Thetford location.
Add a separate Pontefract location.
Split Bury into Bury and Sudbury
Add a separate Bodmin location
Provinces:
Merge Hertford, St Albans( which would be added) and Bedford into Bedfordshire (or Hertfordshire)
rename the remaining part of Bedfordshire to Oxfordshire (or Berkshire)
These comments leave me somewhat puzzled. In no cases have you given any reasons why these changes should be made. That's not very helpful IMHO.
 
Last edited:
  • 3Like
  • 2
Reactions:
I’m pretty sure in that event it would revert to being ruled by the King of England. Maybe there’ll be a decision available to England for them to invest in their heir the title Prince of Wales.
With differing succession laws confirmed, I wouldn't rule out the possibility of a custom succession law ensuring that the title always goes straight to the King of England's heir (or second-in-line in the event that the Prince of Wales predeceases the King).

That said an event would work fine, too. Title reverting to the Crown until the heir is formally invested as Prince of Wales.
 
  • 4
Reactions:
I thought that I should read other people's comments before posting my own. I got through 20 pages only to find this thread has now reached 37 pages and the map has been updated, so that's the last time I try to do that! Apologies if I duplicate things. My comments are based on the updated locations map.

Looking at the topography map, I am surprised that the Wells location isn't Marshes. There were small-scale efforts to drain the Somerset Levels by the 14th century, but the main effort wasn't until the 17th and 18th centuries.

This is absolutely fantastic; diolch for putting the effort into this. I often enjoy leading a Welsh revival in CK2 and CK3 so I hope to put these in use one day.

As other posts have said, I do worry that you are setting a trap for yourself by separating Westminster from London and making it the capital of England.

I see that the Manchester Location has been renamed Salford on the latest map. I understand why this was suggested, because Salford Hundred was a significant administrative area with its own courts. It's tricky because in the 13th century the two towns were similar in size, but the 14th century is exactly when the textile boom turned Manchester into a much bigger place. There's a famous mural by Ford Madox Brown in Manchester Town Hall that dates the arrival of Flemish weavers to precisely 1363, but AFAIK that date is poetic licence and it could be any date after Philippa of Hainault became Queen of England in 1328. I guess it depends on whether you are aiming to represent the status quo in 1337 (equal towns but Salford was the name of the wider area) or the bulk of the Project Caesar time period (when Manchester was the economic engine of all Lancashire).


I am pleased that Crewe has rightly been changed to Nantwich, for the reason given. The "wich" in Nantwich probably means "a place where salt is mined" and the industry existed as far back as Roman times and was thriving at the time of the Domesday Book. You might want to expand this Location slightly northwards, so that it includes in the salt towns of Middlewich and Northwich in mid- Cheshire. Middlewich alone has a whole Wikipedia article discussing the historical salt industry and possibly had higher production than Nantwich in 1337. While there is only one salt mine left today (in nearby Winsford), its effects are still felt effect today, because in the 19th century the salt was brought down the Weaver to be turned into chemicals in Halton, which led to major investment by firms like ICI in the 20th century, which is why today, Cheshire has several high-tech industries giving it the highest productivity in the North of England. So please add the salt to start all this off.

Staying with Cheshire, I see that it's been placed in the Midlands Area. From an economic point of view, it should be in the Northumbria Area. Cheshire's rivers flow north, not south, and so its economy has always been linked to Lancashire. The line of low hills along the border between Cheshire and Staffordshir, forming the watershed between the Mersey and Trent basins, are a better place to put that boundary. However, you have talked about adding Marcher mechanics, which should definitely apply to Cheshire if they exist, so those political considerations might be more important. I will try to write another post on that if I get more time.



The reason the Britannia Bridge (the railway bridge over the Menai Sttait) is so high was because the Admiralty required that warships (which in 1845 still often had sails) should still be able to use the strait after the bridge was built. If it was a naval necessity in the 19th century, it must have been possible to sail a medieval warship through the strait. Also, the centre of the Kingdom of Gwynedd was mostly at Aberffraw on Anglesey. I think that was mainlyfor economic reasons (the flatlands of Anglesey produced more taxable surplus than the mountains of Great Britain) but I've always wondered whether the protection offered by the Menai Strait was another reason for it.






These comments leave me somewhat puzzled. In no cases have you given any reasons why these changes should be made. That's not very helpful IMHO.
I mostly took areas where I felt there was a lack of locations, and tried to add new locations. I also looked at the largest towns in England in 1334 that were not included in the map. to find names for proposed locations, I searched among towns in the area to find one that seemed most appropriate
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Absolutely we have nothing on the scale of the alps. That being said neither does England/Wales. I think it all has to be seen within the context of allowing gameplay to follow the historical trends. The Pennines were a barrier, as was Snowdonia, Wicklow and Kerry. Therefore they should all have similar treatment (i.e. definitely not just labelled as bog). That being said, anyone who has tried to bring a group hiking through a bog will be able to attest that it can be damned near impassible in winter. I wonder if density of impassible terrain is the best way to think about it when it comes to severity of mountain range....
I suppose we need to consider what the impact of the various terrain types will be. If a marsh is more defensible/more costly to traverse/occupy than hills, then it might be more appropriate to leave them as marshes.
 
Wicklow
I had a bit more of a think about this layout and think something like this might work better in Wicklow within the mechanics of the game. The impassible territory now follows the core spine of the wicklow mountains.
View attachment 1150058
This also allows the creation of a Ó Broin faction in Leinster (Gleann Dá Loch based) who used to harrass the English & the kings of Leinster from the mountains. They would burn down towns and generally be a massive nuisance until the flight of the earls.
online sources:
- https://www.wicklow(dot)ie/Portals/0/Documents/Arts%20Heritage%20&%20Archives/Heritage/Cultural%20Heritage/Our%20Cultural%20Heritage/)Wicklow_LateMiddleAges_.pdf
- https://heritage.wicklowheritage(dot)org/topics/the_last_county/the_last_county_-_the_obyrnes_and_the_shiring_of_wicklow

My basic point is that the conquest of Ireland was not some easy breeze where the English came in and swept the Gaels out of the way. It was an incredibly hard fought campaign with ebbs and flows where the defenders succesfully used the terrain to resist encroachment for centuries.

Kerry
Also redrew my Kerry suggestion to be more accurate to the topography.
View attachment 1150060

Finally, would it be possible to see a full map with all the Irish placenames? I think we could help identify halfway decent names for most places.
Having the Wicklow mountains as impassible terrain is a bit silly I think. They're very much passable, especially if you do it on horseback, in fact much of Wicklow's population would live up in the hills until very recently. Where Wicklow became dominated by suburban coastal towns. although I do agree that Wicklow needs to be split into more locations, I believe splitting of modern day Bray and Greystones is more accurate as they were controlled by the important baronies of Killincarrig and Rathdown. I'd say it would be better to give all of the Wicklow mountains to Gleandalough, but then to make Blessington it's own location, although it definitely wouldn't be called Blessington at game start.

I do agree with you about Kerry, although I'm confused as to why you would rename Dingle, was the town founded more recently. Even then it seems a bit weird to use the name of the entire peninsula, seeing as it's usually just referred to as "An Daingean".
 
  • 2Like
Reactions:
All hail Kind Eadward III,
This is my first time writing in these forums so please bear with me. I am a full-time student of linguistics at an educational institute in Sweden focusing on the development and history of the English language. As a result I can not speak to the cultural differences in England at the start date of Project Caesar, however, I can give pointers to the geographical boundaries for English dialects at the time. The monolithic English culture that Paradox has chosen to go with in some ways makes a lot of sense. The wars with Scotland during Edward I reign coupled with incessant fighting on the continent against the French had led to an early English identity developing in Britain. However, linguistically speaking, the were still marked differences between different parts of England. It is important to keep in mind that England at this point was largely a trilingual society, strange as that may sound today.

Latin was the language of the Church and administration, whereas various French dialects held sway over courtly, legal and aristocratic life. Middle English was spoken by the peasantry and in certain legal courts. In the lowest manorial courts, the entire legal procedure could take place in English, whereas at higher levels it was held in French. Judges would give their verdicts in Norman French, which would then be recorded in Latin.

The point I am trying to make is that England was a linguistic whirlpool, constantly shifting the usages of these languages. Norse, Middle English, Norman French, Angevin French, Francien French and Latin all molded the language and culture of England over time and to varying extents in different regions. Scandinavian influence survived for longer in Northern England, whereas French had a more marked impact on Southern England. The Midlands, particularly the West Midlands closer to Wales were less affected by these intrusive forces. A clear example of the impact of this trilingualism that survives to this day is that English has three words for denoting king-like behaviour, i.e "Kingly", from Old English, "Royal", from Old French, and "Regal", from Latin via French.

Moreover, the use of French as a language of education and law in Medieval England was seriously disputed when the Hundred Years' War erupted. In 1349, the University of Oxford adopted English as the language of instruction, shifting from Latin and French. Because of the war, French was seen as the language of the enemy in England, and the dialect of Norman French widely spoken among the elites in England had shifted from the Norman French spoken on the continent, developing a new insular French dialect in England usually referred to as Anglo-Norman. These changes were largely spurred by the loss of Normandy in 1204, prompting the French-speaking aristocracy in England to identify more with an English identity. The mother tongue of English kings from 1066 to 1399 were various dialects of French, mainly Norman and Angevin French. However in 1399, with the accession of Henry IV, this pattern ended and English would hence be the mother tongue of English monarchs.

The reason for writing all this background is to make the point that linguistic history in real life is very complex, and not at all like CK3's "Hybridise Culture" mechanic that happens instantaneously. As a wise man once said; CK3 is not canon. Rather cultural and linguistic blending is a gradual process, and geographical boundaries play a vital part in determining the efficacy of its spread. French influence spread outwards from Westminster and manorial holdings across England, whereas Norse influence spread from the Scandinavian settlements in the old Danelaw. These had a profound effect on dialects spoken across England. As Lord Lambert mentioned in a recent video on the Tinto Talks, bairn is used in northern England even today, a loan word from Old Norse, cognate with Swedish barn. Anther example is that meat used to mean what we today would call food, cognate with Swedish mat. These words survived far longer in the north because the Norman conquest was a top-down, south-to-north process.

Returning then to what I think is the main question, how should England be divided culturally?
In my opinion there are 4 reasonable options.
  • Option A would be to follow what modern linguistic historians recognise as the five main dialects of Middle English. Namely, Northern (sometimes including Scots), West Midland, East Midland, Southern and Southeastern/Kentish. This is the standard division usually taught at universities, however in my opinion, this sort of granularity is unnecessary, and I suspect highly unbalanced for Project Caesar.
option a.jpg
  • Option B Is to follow what people in Medieval England themselves recognised as the main dialects. This would see the East and West Midland dialects merge to a unified Midland dialect, and Kentish absorbed into Southern dialect. Hence we would have three main dialects, Northern, Midland, Southern. I strongly advocate for this option.
option b.jpg
  • Option C would be to follow less dialectal boundaries and more cultural boundaries and split England in two at the Humber, Northern and Southern. If PC goes in this direction, then I am highly opposed to calling it "Northumbrian" and "English". Northumbrians were English, it is as simple as that.
option c.jpg
  • Option D would be to keep a monolithic English culture, which culturally makes the most sense for the time period, however is highly linguistically insensitive to the situation in 1337. Keep in mind that England and France developed nationalistic tendencies early as a result of the Hundred Years' War.


Sources used:
Encyclopedia Britannica:
Potter, Simeon and Crystal, David. "English language". Encyclopedia Britannica, 1 Jun. 2024. Accessed 18 June 2024.
Harvard University's Geoffrey Chaucer Website:
Benson, Larry. "Middle English Dialects". Harvard's Geoffrey Chaucer Website. Accessed 18 June 2024.
Lecture from my university
Nordlund, Marie. "History of Language: Middle English". Luleå University of Technology, 20 Jan. 2023. Accessed 18 June 2024.

Quick side note: There are more lectures from my university I could source, however they are not publicly available so I see no reason to.
 
  • 20
  • 18Like
  • 3
  • 3
  • 1Love
Reactions:
From a gameplay standpoint, one of the possible benefits to a more granular English culture that I haven't seen talked about is if there were to be an ahistorical breaking of the kingdom either in the Wars of the Roses or the English Civil War. If that were two happen, the presence of two separate English states would undoubtedly cause some level of divergence in culture. With a more granular setup this could play out as a breakaway region retaining a separate culture while a unitary English state would assimilate all of these cultures into a monolith.

Not the best or most historically accurate way of modelling it at all but worth considering imo especially since we don't actually know how cultural mechanics will play yet.
 
  • 6
  • 3
  • 1Like
Reactions:
I find it strange to see mountains in Scotlan but have hills in the borderlands of Bohemia and Moravia, when Ben Nevis wouldn´t be even in the top 10 of highest mountains in Czechia today.
 
  • 3
  • 2Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Also worth noting is that (basically) the unification and homogenisation of English (both culturally and politically) was mainly a policy from the Tudors onwards. The (York) Plantegenets were actually moving the country in a more regional, more devolved direction prior to the war and if we don't get the historical outcome, this could easily have continued.
 
  • 4Like
Reactions:
Since the community seems about 50:50 split on separating English culture, here's a sketch of how a Northern English culture could look. It's far from a definitive choice, just to extend the discussion a little.


View attachment 1149186
there's definitely a cultural divide between north and south, it'd be cool to see that represented
 
Last edited:
  • 2Like
Reactions:
I propose a Balkanization of Scotland for 1337. The Scottish magnates are very powerful and independent in 1337 - since 1250 the kings of Scotland granted increasing amounts of power to their magnates, and Robert the Bruce solidified his rule by increasing those grants. Unlike in England, the powerful magnates of Scotland had consolidated holdings, and they were vital in supporting David II against Edward Balliol, because Balliol was supported by the Disinherited who stood to gain lands held by those magnates.

I would even go so far as to argue that instead of having Scotland on the map at game start, the war is between Bruce with various Scottish vassals and Balliol supported by the English - if Edward Balliol became King of Scotland, he would have almost certainly paid homage to Edward III as his overlord and accept

The most powerful magnates in 1337 were as follows: Robert Stewart, the future Robert II, High Steward of Scotland, heir to his eight years younger uncle David II; John Randolph, Earl of Moray, holding a massive amount of land from Inverness to Elgin, as well as the rich lordship of Badenoch; William MacTaggart, Earl of Ross; William de Moravia, Earl of Sutherland; Malise V of Strathearn, Earl of Caithness and Jarl of Orkney, with a claim on Strathearn, which was stripped from him by Edward Balliol and is coveted by Robert Stewart; and, of course, John of Islay, Lord of the Isles, controlling most of the Hebrides - although his holdings in 1337 should be smaller than they are shown right now.

Using the excellent maps updated by hellfiremat and Batcats, this is a rough political map of Scotland with Bruce vs Balliol and the various magnates as vassals.
scotland_locations_after.png

scotland_politcal_after.png


In 1336, Andrew Murray recaptured Bothwell and drove Balliol and the English to a few fortresses - Perth and Cupar in the north and Stirling and Edinburgh just to the south. Balliol's strongest hold was in Galloway and Lothian, but William Douglas was leading rebellion in Lothian, represented by holding Selkirk Forest. Similarly, Dunbar Castle was under seige but was only a few months away from outlasting the seige.

Steward, Moray, Ross, Sutherland, Caithness, Dunbar, and Uist are all vassals of Bruce and support David II.

The Isles is an interesting question. First of all, Arran was not held by the Isles for at least another century - Arran was the site of a royal castle. Kintyre as well was not held by John of Islay quite yet, instead being mostly under the control of Robert Stewart. The isle of Skye is another point - The Earl of Ross had been feuding with the Islemen for a long time, and Skye doesn't actually fall under the control of the Isles until they took Ross in the late 1300s. Furthermore, John MacDonald shared the leadership of the Islemen with his cousin Ranald MacRuairi, who is Lord of Uist and Garmoran. John was married to Ranald's heir and sister Amy, and wouldn't take control of Uist and Garmoran until Ranald was killed by the Earl of Ross in 1346. In 1337, John of Islay was Lord of Islay, Mull, Ardtornish, and Lewis and Harris. Technically, John had paid homage to Edward III and Edward Balliol, but it doesn't appear that he ever provided any support before Balliol was driven out of Scotland and it would make sense to represent Islay as a disloyal vassal or even not a vassal at all, but have an event which has whoever wins the civil war can regain that vassalage, maybe one where the AI always accepts the vassalization while a player could choose to try and fight for indepdence. I would include the grant of Lochaber from Moray and Kintyre from Steward to the Isles as part of that vassalization.

From the Wars of Scotland 1214-1371 by Michael Brown, here's a map of the magnates of Scotland from 1357-1371
1718738907179.png

At this point, Robert Stewart has gained the throne as Robert II and begun to consolidate land under his sons and kinsmen, but you can see that the Isles, the Highland earls, the Earl of Dunbar/March, and the Earl of Douglas (the title was technically not granted until the 50s, but Douglas gained huge lands in Lothian after driving out Balliol as a favorite fo David II.

One small note about Sutherland. Sutherland had competition in the area with the MacKays of Strathnaver, who could be considered to hold Durness and Tongue, and it could make sense to put Durness and Tongue as held by Bruce but with lots of autonomy to represent that.

Here's a version using the existing politcal map of Scotland:
scotland_political_old.png



Sources:

THE WARS OF SCOTLAND 1214-1371 by Michael Brown
THE KINGSHIP OF DAVID II, 1329-71 by Michael A Penman
 
  • 11
  • 9Like
Reactions:
What would the correct level of stratification look like to you? I'm curious about the general ratio of peasants (petty landowners) vs tribesmen (landless mobile) and how that would vary in each part of Ireland.
Tbh lots of tribes, especially chiefdoms, can also be very stratified, which does make the monolithic tribesman pop a bit problematic but I'm happy it's in the game
 
  • 1Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Also worth noting is that (basically) the unification and homogenisation of English (both culturally and politically) was mainly a policy from the Tudors onwards. The (York) Plantegenets were actually moving the country in a more regional, more devolved direction prior to the war and if we don't get the historical outcome, this could easily have continued.
Link to this being a thought out policy rather than weakness after usurping the throne
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Link to this being a thought out policy rather than weakness after usurping the throne

I think you have misunderstood me - the Tudors (who userped the throne) were the ones moving to unify and centralise power, following their victory.
 
Option D would be to keep a monolithic English culture, which culturally makes the most sense for the time period, however is highly linguistically insensitive to the situation in 1337. Keep in mind that England and France developed nationalistic tendencies early as a result of the Hundred Years' War.

Thank you for the write-up, really interesting things. I prefer option D as I believe language and dialect are not the same thing as culture, and England is the prototypical nation-state according to many scholars on nationalism.

I would go further and argue that France could also lose some granularity. Poitevin and Saintongeais could easily be merged, as could Gallo and Angevin, and Francien and Berrichon.

Also worth noting is that (basically) the unification and homogenisation of English (both culturally and politically) was mainly a policy from the Tudors onwards. The (York) Plantegenets were actually moving the country in a more regional, more devolved direction prior to the war and if we don't get the historical outcome, this could easily have continued.

Adrian Hastings and other scholars on ethnosymbolic nationalism argue that the formation of the nation and common cultural identity of England dates to as early as 1380s. Hastings believes England is the first and oldest example of a mature nation, due to a very particular role that the monarchy and Catholic Church played. The unification of England was already underway prior to the Tudors.

Hastings is not without criticism and I don't agree with his theories but I think it is valid to consider that if the most quintessential example of a state with a national culture is made granular, how excessive are the other places in the world going to be?

I have yet to see any reason whatsoever for granularity in England. Even what you are saying in regards to decentralisation would still arguably yield a singular English culture, albeit with the survival of more distinct dialects in theory.
 
  • 5Like
Reactions:
Adrian Hastings and other scholars on ethnosymbolic nationalism argue that the formation of the nation and common cultural identity of England dates to as early as 1380s. Hastings believes England is the first and oldest example of a mature nation, due to a very particular role that the monarchy and Catholic Church played. The unification of England was already underway prior to the Tudors.

Hastings is not without criticism and I don't agree with his theories but I think it is valid to consider that if the most quintessential example of a state with a national culture is made granular, how excessive are the other places in the world going to be?

I have yet to see any reason whatsoever for granularity in England.
 
  • 8Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Hastings is not without criticism and I don't agree with his theories but I think it is valid to consider that if the most quintessential example of a state with a national culture is made granular, how excessive are the other places in the world going to be?

France has 14 (18 including french- bretons, lowlanders and alpine, plus 1 non-french bretons) seperate regional cultures. England could be justifiably represented with 2 (with 6 more non-English cultures in the British Isles).

And as for the reason, it's mainly about what should or shouldn't be a 'default' outcome; a lot of Paradox games are essentially implictly railroaded because decisions about the history is based on a view of how things turned out, rather than how they looked at the time.
  • In CK2/3, the Anglosaxon Kingdoms are Duchies because they historically unified. A lot of the gameplay drives countries towards the De Jure Kingdoms present at gamestart (which is why the 800s start almost never comes to resemble the 1060s start), so the Anglosaxon kingdoms are destined to unify, whereas Bohemia and Moravia will likely remain seperate and Lotheringia will likely remain.
  • In EUIV, the trade mapmode essentially forces the flow of wealth towards Europe and guarentees that England/Netherlands, Venice and Aragon/Genoa will be the main trade hubs in every game.

Other games are over a short enough timeframe that the level of railroading is less of a problem, but for the several-centurary CK and EU games, it becomes really noticable.

So the purpose in having English culture started split and then being unified as a result of how the England player plays is that it allows the game to go in different ways - in some cases you might get a unified British Isles, in others you might get a continuous errosion of power leading to a fragmented set of states across the British Isles.
 
  • 4
  • 2Like
Reactions:
While I agree with your characterisation of the Irish 'mountains' as being little more than overgrown hills the same could be said for the mountains of England & Wales. I should know, I've climbed lots of them! The relevant list is probably the Hewitt's which characterise the peaks over 2000ft & ~100ft prominence. Of this list, English mountains feature far less prevalently than their Welsh & Irish counterparts. The Wicklow mountains in particular were a thorn in the side of English domination for centuries. One only has to look at how the pale was spread much further inland than along the south coast. The main road through the mountains (the military road) was only built as a preventative measure against another rebellion in the aftermath of the 1798 rebellion. Which just goes to show how long it was until the mountains could be totally subdued as a threat.

If anything the prevailing weather conditions (particullarly on the west coast of Ireland) would make those mountains nearly entirely impassible at any scale for medieval people in winter.
@GerryMandarian, I'll place your requested map here as well (both 3000x3000 pixels):
The relative prominence of Wicklow mountains is very clear indeed, but is less pronounced than the Lake District, which is also considered hills in the current design.
Especially the flatlands passage in the Dumfries region is bothering me.

TRI-based classification (scale in attachment)
British Isles.png
Linear Heightmap (0 - 1250 m)
British Isles_02_LinearHeightmap.png
Current Tinto design
1718745612218.png
1718745873730.png
 
Last edited:
  • 4Like
  • 3
  • 1Love
  • 1
Reactions: