Tinto Maps #8 - 28th of June 2024 - Russia

[Cuke]

In 1999, I was in several villages in the Smolensk region and they spoke Belarusian, it was a separate dialect, but it was definitely Belarusian.

On the basis of the same evidence - Smolensk lands are a gradual continuum between Belarusian and Muscovite.

Why do you think that there was any kind of all-Russian identity at all?

Because there was. People from Halych to Vyatka identified themselves as Russians. They weren't the same universal kind of Russians, but still.

If we don't distinguish Pomeranians, Silesians, Lesserpolans and Greaterpolans in Poland, I don't think we should distinguish Ruthenians from Mokovians or Novgorodians.

I think it's just a matter of size. Poland is smaller, so it has fewer divisions. We do distinguish Silesians, iirc (they were mentioned in an earlier talk on Poland).

 

[Adrianople]

"Time to start flame about Eastern Slavic cultures. 3 second before start of flame... 2... 1... go!"
Let's go!

I'm truly uncertain about the cultures... Don't they look far-fetched? The Rutenian culture is incredibly important. It allows us to simulate the real historical process, showing how the Ukrainian and Belarusian identities developed in western Rus. But what are the Novgorodian, Muscovite, and Severian supposed to symbolize? Moscow's expansion is only beginning, so why are the surrounding principalities, even hostile ones like Tver, also labeled as Muscovite? Honestly, this feels like a gamey choice, and I believe the Caesar project shines best when it leans on history, not when it tries to fit history into gameplay.

We have a wealth of historical data indicating that in the 14th century, the Eastern and Western Rus languages began to diverge into two distinct languages. From the Western language, Ukrainian and Belarusian would later emerge. However, there was no significant split in the Eastern Rus language. Yes, there were various dialects, but the differences were minor.

I understand that portraying the cultures of 14th century Rus is a complex issue. Due to the assimilation efforts by Moscow later on, many cultures did not survive to the present day. But wouldn't unified Rus culture be better choise? Similar to the case with Ruthenia? This would be a simplification, but a logical one, unlike the invented cultures of the Muscovite, Severian, and Novgorodian. It might disrupt the balance, as there would be a large, unified culture in this region from the start. But wouldn't that make the region more unique? And this uniqueness would be dictated by history, not gameplay reasons, which I see as a win. We already have a historical political division in the region. Is it worth putting an artificial cultural division on top of it?

As an alternative, I would make several cultures in the region, but mix them up in the locations. We will take the peoples who lived on this territory before the emergence of Kievan Rus, and show that during its short existence, the principality did not assimilate all these people (as in reality it was). There will be several cultures in the region, and while playing in this region, the player will have to assimilate them. But the player will face this task when playing for any principality, be it Moscow, Tver or Novgorod. And it won’t be that Novgorod will start with its unique Novgorodian culture, and Moscow with its Muscovite...

In any case, I am not a historian, just an enthusiast. But as someone with a great interest in this region, the cultures currently presented in the game seem contradictory and illogical to me... Perhaps someone more knowledgeable could provide a better alternative.

The problem is the very idea that simplification would be the best choice. It's precisely because of simplification through historiography from the side of Moscow that the path that Paradox is taking is the best choice. It represents the Rus (those who lived in the Rus Land) and other East Slavic speaking groups, such as the Novgorodians (who spoke the Novgorodian language) and the Muscovites, whose heavily Church Slavonic influenced language would eventually take unilaterally the term Rus for itself, despite a rather massive lack of any sort of legitimacy. I would remove the Severian group, precisely because the language spoken in Smaliensk was Belarusian until the latter half of the 19th century and first half of the 20th. Conflation of the East Slavic languages and people as "one nation divided" is an unpleasant legacy of Soviet and Tsarist historiographic obfuscation. There was also no "Eastern Rus" and "Western Rus". There was Muscovy and there was Rus. Muscovy ended up conquering Rus and filching the name through the Hellenised "Rossija".

Another important thing to consider: We must pay attention to historiographies. Russian historiography purposefully conflates Russian, Ukrainian and Belarusian history as one. This is why in Russian the inhabitants of the Rus Land are called "Ancient Russians" (Russian: древнерусские), despite the existence of endonyms that still survive in Ukrainian and Belarusian, that being "Rusyn" (Ukrainian: Русин, Belarusian: Русіны) from Old East Slavic "роусинъ". Therefore it is important to note that conflating the Muscovite culture and language with the Rus is nothing but historical revisionism that only serves old propaganda concerning the idea that Ukrainians and Belarusians are not self-standing peoples, and are rather misguided offshoots of the allegedly true Rus in Moscow.

Edit: As usual, the Russian trolls have come out to bombard my replies with propaganda. Yay.

 

[Fulmen]

The Finnish border remains too west on the Karelian Isthmus. This is more minor, but I also see that the 1940/44 Salla border once again made it to a PDX game set well before the 1940s. Thus far we've seen it in at least Europa Universalis 1, 2, 4, Victoria 2 and 3 (pre-release with 3, though the 1947 anachronism with Jäniskoski-Niskakoski remains) and Crusader Kings 2 and 3. North Karelia is also incorrectly named as Far Karelia. The real Far Karelia is east of East Karelia.

Also, historically White Karelia includes the Kantalahti area and bay on the Kola Peninsula (see the maps below). It was transferred to the Murmansk Oblast by the USSR in 1938, which is why the Republic of Karelia today is missing the northern third of White Karelia. It seems PDX based White Karelia's borders on modern administrative borders. The Solovetsky Islands too were historically a part of White Karelia, with the monastery the Russians established there after driving the locals out administering parts of it.

(click to enlarge)

I don't mind using Swedish place names, but it's done on an arbitrary basis (some places outside Swedish control use Swedish names, others, e.g. Mikkeli, use Finnish names, at random), but a number of Finnish place names are straight up misspelled:

Vartsila = Värtsilä
Lahdenpoja = Lahdenpohja
Mökhö = Möhkö
Loymola = Loimola
Riistina = Ristiina

I would also rename Olofsborg to Nyslott. Olofsborg Castle was, as far as I can tell, mainly just referred to as Nyslott historically, which remains the official Swedish name of the city that grew around the castle (Savonlinna in Finnish), even though apparently the castle was christened after Saint Olaf already in the 15th century. Whatever the case the province is best named Nyslott after the population centre, if not after the castle itself.

I'm not sure I agree with making half of White Karelia impassable. Historically there were a lot of raids back and forth through this area. Some examples from the Russo-Swedish 25-Years'-War of 1570-1595:



(click to enlarge)

The most noticeable eastward Finnish attacks in the war of 1570-1595 and the border achieved in the 1595 Treaty of Teusina [which soon thereafter in practice shifted considerably eastwards north of Kuhmo, as noted in the following map -F]


(click to enlarge)

Regarding the 1570-1595 attacks east, there is also the following description (my translation):

THE FINNS' ATTACKS EAST were directed partially into Ingria, partially into Olonets Karelia, White Karelia and the Kola Peninsula.

When the Finn, Herman Fleming, had received command over Finland's troops, he without delay attacked over into Russia in 1572 with his ski troops. After the truce that followed from this had expired, he in 1577 attacked into Ingria with his Finnish light cavalry, which now made their first appearance, and destroyed areas within the counties of Kexholm and Oreshek (later Nöteborg). In 1578 Henrik Horn advanced there with a force of 2,500 men and the following winter Horn extended his campaign all the way to Novgorod. When Poland's King Stephen Bátory also attacked Russia in 1579, and the Tatars too were attacking in the south, the military operations on our eastern frontiers received growing strength and Sweden's Johan too got underway with his attack plans, although this was not because of an alliance with Poland. In 1580 Pontus De la Gardie conquered Kexholm, which was left in Finnish hands for 17 years, and in 1581 he marched a force spanning 3,500 men over the Gulf of Finland and conquered Rakvere and Narva. At the same time in 1590 when Swedish forces rebelled in Narva against their Finnish commanders and fraternised with the Russians, Councilor Morits Grip attacked inland with a force of c. 15,000 men, because the Russians, despite their numerical superiority, fled behind their castle walls. In 1591 Commander-in-Chief Klaus Fleming attacked against Novgorod, but the Russians once again evaded making battle (W. Tawaststjerna).

At the same time attacks were also made north of Lake Ladoga. In 1573 the Bailiff of Savonlinna, Yrjö Maununpoika, advanced into Russia and destroyed places on a 30-40 league area. In 1579 the Finns attacked to the coasts of the White Sea. In 1580 a "thousand-head strong" force of "Kainuians" marched to White Karelia and laid siege to the pile castle of Jyskyjärvi [this is located in the area made impassalbe in-game, btw -F]. In 1581 Klaus Hermansson Fleming advanced to Tulemajärvi and all the way to the Syväri [Svir], when large Olonetsian villages were deserted. In 1589 Juho Vesainen led a 700-man strong force along the Koutajoki river to Kannanlahti and conquered several Kolan villages along with the entire province of Kemi [Kem i.e. Vienan Kemi; White Karelia's Kemi -F]. In 1590 he attacked Petsamo, burned down a monastery and killed all the Russian monks and their servants there. In 1592 Suma castle by the White Sea was conquered by military commander Bagge.

 

[Alexsandr_Rau]

The problem is the very idea that simplification would be the best choice. It's precisely because of simplification through historiography from the side of Moscow that the path that Paradox is taking is the best choice. It represents the Rus (those who lived in the Rus Land) and other East Slavic speaking groups, such as the Novgorodians (who spoke the Novgorodian language) and the Muscovites, whose heavily Church Slavonic influenced language would eventually take unilaterally the term Rus for itself, despite a rather massive lack of any sort of legitimacy. I would remove the Severian group, precisely because the language spoken in Smaliensk was Belarusian until the latter half of the 19th century and first half of the 20th. Conflation of the East Slavic languages and people as "one nation divided" is an unpleasant legacy of Soviet and Tsarist historiographic obfuscation. There was also no "Eastern Rus" and "Western Rus". There was Muscovy and there was Rus. Muscovy ended up conquering Rus and filching the name through the Hellenised "Rossija".

Another important thing to consider: We must pay attention to historiographies. Russian historiography purposefully conflates Russian, Ukrainian and Belarusian history as one. This is why in Russian the inhabitants of the Rus Land are called "Ancient Russians" (Russian: древнерусские), despite the existence of endonyms that still survive in Ukrainian and Belarusian, that being "Rusyn" (Ukrainian: Русин, Belarusian: Русіны) from Old East Slavic "роусинъ". Therefore it is important to note that conflating the Muscovite culture and language with the Rus is nothing but historical revisionism that only serves old propaganda concerning the idea that Ukrainians and Belarusians are not self-standing peoples, and are rather misguided offshoots of the allegedly true Rus in Moscow.

Why deny someone and write him out as a “Russian” or write him down as an inferior “Russian”.
Moreover, in 1337 there were no Muscovites, but there were Suzdal residents (Vladimir residents).

This is also the position of chauvinism, only with the opposite sign.

Our year is 1337. Since there are a bunch of French cultures, we can easily make at least 20 conventional “ancient Russian” cultures. Each principality has its own culture.
and leave issues of nationalism and other negativity out of the game.

 

[Cuke]

his is why in Russian the inhabitants of the Rus Land are called "Ancient Russians" (Russian: древнерусские),

What is the source for your statement?

"Rusyn" (Ukrainian: Русин, Belarusian: Русіны) from Old East Slavic "роусинъ".

Please note than "Rusyn" is a singular individual of a single-person community of Rus. "-yn" is a very common ethnic suffix in such cases. E.g. Litva -> litvin, Mordva -> mordvin. Besides, its first surviving use is not even Muscovite - it's Novgorodian in a Novgorod-Gotland treaty from the 1100s,

 

[Reimond77]

After the black plague, the role of states began to increase and with it the sense of self-awareness of the people. From the point of view of the people, the all-Russian identity is definitely preserved, because everyone identifies themselves as Russians. But from the point of view of countries, not everything is so clear anymore, some words are outdated and instead they are more often used with similar meanings, somewhere they pronounce words with a vowel at the end so as not to swallow consonants. These are not completely different cultures, but it is definitely possible to separate some people from others (as the Yugoslav peoples are now separated from each other). Europa Universalis is a game about countries, not about people like Crusader Kings, so I think that from a gaming position, more divided cultures will look better. The Principality of Smolensk fought on the side of Lithuania, then on the side of Moscow, and in some alternative history it could well have developed its own culture. Therefore, I do not mind at all that there should be more cultures, even if there were no special differences between them in the real history. But I also don't mind if these are larger cultural formations. With the help of mods, it will still be possible to set a suitable separation option for yourself.

 

[Cephei80]

The problem is the very idea that simplification would be the best choice. It's precisely because of simplification through historiography from the side of Moscow that the path that Paradox is taking is the best choice. It represents the Rus (those who lived in the Rus Land) and other East Slavic speaking groups, such as the Novgorodians (who spoke the Novgorodian language) and the Muscovites, whose heavily Church Slavonic influenced language would eventually take unilaterally the term Rus for itself, despite a rather massive lack of any sort of legitimacy. I would remove the Severian group, precisely because the language spoken in Smaliensk was Belarusian until the latter half of the 19th century and first half of the 20th. Conflation of the East Slavic languages and people as "one nation divided" is an unpleasant legacy of Soviet and Tsarist historiographic obfuscation. There was also no "Eastern Rus" and "Western Rus". There was Muscovy and there was Rus. Muscovy ended up conquering Rus and filching the name through the Hellenised "Rossija".

Another important thing to consider: We must pay attention to historiographies. Russian historiography purposefully conflates Russian, Ukrainian and Belarusian history as one. This is why in Russian the inhabitants of the Rus Land are called "Ancient Russians" (Russian: древнерусские), despite the existence of endonyms that still survive in Ukrainian and Belarusian, that being "Rusyn" (Ukrainian: Русин, Belarusian: Русіны) from Old East Slavic "роусинъ". Therefore it is important to note that conflating the Muscovite culture and language with the Rus is nothing but historical revisionism that only serves old propaganda concerning the idea that Ukrainians and Belarusians are not self-standing peoples, and are rather misguided offshoots of the allegedly true Rus in Moscow.

dude this is literally the 1600s polish narrative to keep claims on smolensk and kyevu and unrecognize moscow as true hire of Russia .
its literally part of narrative of some peoples who did dig back that polish view on Russia to use today on twitter. Poland when it was the strongest it refused to call Russia by its name so it purposfully called them moscovites for nearly a century and kept forcing some narratives so poland can keep some lands in Rusland such as smolensk.
fact is ,
Rus land or Russia = all Rus principalities . its their Reich / Unified entity , cease using modern day squable to make irrelevent fissures relevent such as language differences. if china break today will use you say out of spite to china that cantonese are not chinese just because they didnt join china till WU conquered them in the 200s ?

Rus tsars were always being called "Tsars of all of RUSSIAS" on Plural , Plural meant there was many little Russias , that mean each principality was a Russia doesnt matter its language or culture . and each one of them could ascend to form a centralized Russia. reminder that when kyevu was the one Ruling it was simply known as Rossija, the term kievan rus is a 19th century one just like the term byzantine .
doesnt matter if it was novgorod and Kyevu or Moscow , they all once Rulled as leaders of collective of the principalities and were known as Russia with tsars being called tsars of all of Russias .
and reminder that the term belarus or white ruthenia was the polish side of Russia , part of why poland refused for a century to call Russia by its name so it used the term mosovite out of spite because it had its own agenda and claim over the land.
the term ukraine also didnt appear till the 17th century to describe a totally different entity that was the hetmanate of zaporizhia that was a cossack marauder tribe dwelling between ottomans in crimea , poles in kyevu and Russians , hence come the term ukraine that mean the broder land and this name is totally unrelated to the previous Rus entities that existed in the region and ended up either joining the polish russian dream or unified pricipalities under a tsar in russia proper.

so when you say that Russia try to to show that ukraine and belarus and russia proper are 1 entity they are right on the historical term because all 3 were Rus and got to Rule Russia . when you say they are not you are literally using the polish narrative that they did later drop but did reapear past few years due to the ongoing confict as a tool to ridicule Russia and innocent belarus and ukraine from it and show them as totally different regions annexed by "moscovites who have no right to be Russia or Rus" .

 

[Kaspar Osraige]

I wish this thread involved less weird 19th century nationalisms from all parties involved. Much of this discussion is anachronistic, sentimental and ever so slightly racist. People's self identification back then and the senses of oneness and dividedness among the national élites matters the most, if dialect maps are not to be used (in which case I hope Poland also gets fixed according to that).

I also hope Balts and Finns of the Urals to Baltics stretch will get represented, as well as the remaining Hungarians and the Chuvash bros, and also Fenno-Saami and Samoyedic tribal tags, since we get Northern American tribal tags. PLEASE PARADOX I AM OBSESSED WITH NORTHERN EURASIA

 

[Xaroz]

Good work!
Feedback on the climate map.
Lake Ladoga and lake Saimen are so big so they prowides warmth and alternates the local climate. All of Ladogas shores are continental, but as the locations are drawn, its maybe not correct to portray all locations around Ladoga as continental, as the zone is not as wide as the locations. So most of them is maybe correctly depicted as arctic.

-At least Kexholm should be continental.

-I'm ambivalent about the area with northern border: Villmanstrand- Jäskis - Lahdenpohja to be continental. It should be continental as is IRL, but maybe its a matter of taste as its on the northern fringe of the zone.

By depicting the locations including Villmanstrand - Jäskis - Lahdenpohja in continental should more properly depict that the area between the karelian lakes is more bountiful. Thats why Viborg and Kexholm is located where they are. A bountiful hinterland and valuable trade from the karelian provinces, due to a milder climate around the Ladoga and Saimen. Its also why the karelian tribe was one of the stronger Finnish tribes.

 

[Xaroz]

Forgot to mention in my recent post:

- Is there a possibility to get the "little ice-age" into the game.. maybe as a disaster? Should it affect output or climate? Dont know.

- other disasters mainly in the north? As "hunger-years" by destroyed harvests by frosts etc, 1867-69 comes to mind but its outside the scope of the game, but there was several during the middle ages.

 

[Adrianople]

dude this is literally the 1600s polish narrative to keep claims on smolensk and kyevu and unrecognize moscow as true hire of Russia .
its literally part of narrative of some peoples who did dig back that polish view on Russia to use today on twitter. Poland when it was the strongest it refused to call Russia by its name so it purposfully called them moscovites for nearly a century and kept forcing some narratives so poland can keep some lands in Rusland such as smolensk.
fact is ,
Rus land or Russia = all Rus principalities . its their Reich / Unified entity , cease using modern day squable to make irrelevent fissures relevent such as language differences. if china break today will use you say out of spite to china that cantonese are not chinese just because they didnt join china till WU conquered them in the 200s ?

Rus tsars were always being called "Tsars of all of RUSSIAS" on Plural , Plural meant there was many little Russias , that mean each principality was a Russia doesnt matter its language or culture . and each one of them could ascend to form a centralized Russia. reminder that when kyevu was the one Ruling it was simply known as Rossija, the term kievan rus is a 19th century one just like the term byzantine .
doesnt matter if it was novgorod and Kyevu or Moscow , they all once Rulled as leaders of collective of the principalities and were known as Russia with tsars being called tsars of all of Russias .
and reminder that the term belarus or white ruthenia was the polish side of Russia , part of why poland refused for a century to call Russia by its name so it used the term mosovite out of spite because it had its own agenda and claim over the land.
the term ukraine also didnt appear till the 17th century to describe a totally different entity that was the hetmanate of zaporizhia that was a cossack marauder tribe dwelling between ottomans in crimea , poles in kyevu and Russians , hence come the term ukraine that mean the broder land and this name is totally unrelated to the previous Rus entities that existed in the region and ended up either joining the polish russian dream or unified pricipalities under a tsar in russia proper.

so when you say that Russia try to to show that ukraine and belarus and russia proper are 1 entity they are right on the historical term because all 3 were Rus and got to Rule Russia . when you say they are not you are literally using the polish narrative that they did later drop but did reapear past few years due to the ongoing confict as a tool to ridicule Russia and innocent belarus and ukraine from it and show them as totally different regions annexed by "moscovites who have no right to be Russia or Rus" .

This is...wow....just utter hogwash. There was one Rus, that is the Rus land, centred in Kyiv. The Primary Chronicle very succinctly provides a pre-Mongol description of what was considered the Rus land and what was simply under Rusian suzerainty.

 

[Cuke]

This is...wow....just utter hogwash. There was one Rus, that is the Rus land, centred in Kyiv. The Primary Chronicle very succinctly provides a pre-Mongol description of what was considered the Rus land and what was simply under Rusian suzerainty.

Please refer to the starting post. We're at 1337, not pre-Mongol time.

 

[Adrianople]

What is the source for your statement?

Please note than "Rusyn" is a singular individual of a single-person community of Rus. "-yn" is a very common ethnic suffix in such cases. E.g. Litva -> litvin, Mordva -> mordvin. Besides, its first surviving use is not even Muscovite - it's Novgorodian in a Novgorod-Gotland treaty from the 1100s,

https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Древнерусская_народность That and every textbook I've ever had to read that covers Rus in the Russian language.

Also, "Rusyn" is older than the 1100s. I do not know what you are trying to prove...

 

[Cuke]

https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Древнерусская_народность That and every textbook I've ever had to read that covers Rus in the Russian language.

Um... neither the page nor any Russian textbook ever call Ancient Russians древнерусские. The page name clearly uses древнерусские as an adjective, not a noun (which is народность, in this particular case).

 

[Pollllo]

If i remember correctly they were already assimilated at the time. In CK3 though - they are definitely supposed to exist at the early start

Maybe and maybe not. It's just hard to state when they were fully assimilated as there's not much to go on. I wonder if any of the cultures in the game right now are like that too, as in it's hard to state.

 

[Micmicc]

Is this the final font you'll be using for the game?

 

[veles212]

Seams wrong for pre-Russian Perm region to have Russian names:

Cherdyn' - subjugated by Moscow in 1472:
Dobryanka - from Dobryi /добрый/ means kind in Russian.
Solikamsk - from Sol' /соль/ means salt in Russian (kamsk - means on river Kama).
Koygorodok - from gorod /город/ means town in Russian.
Afanasyevo - from Russian name Afanasiy /Афанасий/.
Chernaya - /Черная/ means black.
Troitsko-Pechorsk - from Troitsa /троица/ means trinity. Usually in context of sacred trinity, a term from Christianity.
Beryozovka - from Beryoza /береза/ means birch.
Yelovo - from yel' /ель/ means pine in Russian.

Vyatka subjugated by Moscow in 1489:
Orlov - from orel /орел/ means eagle. Now Orlov is a very common Russian family name.
Belozerye - from beloe /белое/ means white and ozero /озеро/ means lake.
Nagorsk - na /на/ means on. Gora /гора/ means mountain.
Nikolsky - from Nikolay /Николай/ common Russian name.

 

[Cuke]

Seems wrong for pre-Russian Perm region to have Russian names:

I'll twist this comment further:
if researchers couldn't come up with period-relevant names for given locations as of 1337 - should these locations feature in the game at all?

 

[Sicilian_Cheese]

Will the mechanism of freezing the northern seas be implemented? After all, this is quite a serious problem for navigation for the northern states.

 

[Tan Norey]

We have vast territories and people from various Slavic tribes who interact and merge with other non-Slavic tribes. So it’s hardly possible to say that they all realized themselves as a single whole. This is the era of feudalism and self-identification occurs according to different principles. For example, the fact that the Polotsk princes, although they were Rurikovichs, always isolated themselves and were called Rogvolod’s grandchildren.