Tinto Maps #9 - 5th of July 2024 - Carpathia and the Balkans

[Uskana]

What Ćirković means here is that the Balšići were a part of Albanian history ruling a significant part of modern day Albania, and thus that Albanian historians have the right to write and research about them, everyone should have the right. Just like Serbian historians can write about Đurađ Kastriot Skenderbeg for he was a part of Serbian history as well, his mother being Serbian from the prominent Branković family. We shouldn't gatekeep, that is an American custom Also, saying non-Slavic origin he meant Vlach, not Albanian in any shape or form (see Ćirković, Istorija Crne Gore 2-2, p. 7).

The wikipedia claim I won't comment, I could edit it right now and link it back to you saying that they were Japanese xd

I said check the SOURCES on the Wiki article. And do you honestly dispute that a lot of historians believe that the Balsha were of Albanian origin? It is literally one of the main theories of their origin.

"The Albanian Balsa held the castle of Budva and owned their own ships between 1368 and 1389. On the one hand, Venice tolerated the piracy of these Albanian lords because of their anti-Ottoman position; on the other hand, their activity restricted its operations. Under Balsa III, who died in 1421, Zeta gained considerable independence in relation to the Despotate of Serbia, which had reinforced its rule over short stretches of the coast, between the Venetian dominions, from 1421 to 1459, the year in which it declined under the Ottoman advance. The same happened to the Balsa family, between the Albanian Plain and the hills as far as Shkodra."

Ivetic, Egidio (2022). History of the Adriatic: A Sea and Its Civilization. John Wiley & Sons

"The Balshas were probably of Albanian stock, but culturally Serbianized to a large degree: they had been Orthodox for a long time, and only converted to Catholicism once or twice for political reasons."

Malcolm 1999.

We can't say for sure what they are exactly, but you can't be intellectually honest and disregard the possibility of them being of Albanian origin, especially since so many historians certainly think that's the case.

And regarding Skanderbegs mother, she could have been a Serbian, but it's also possible that she was Bulgarian, or if Gjon Muzaka is to be believed, a member of the Muzaka family. It isn't really cut and dry that she was Serbian.

In any case, my original point still stands that you can't use a 14th century name list to determine the culture/ethnicity of a group of people.

 

[raz14]

There are sadly enough no clear maps on those small border fiefdoms. I'd suggest a Moldavia tag in some of those provinces, and maybe even as a vassal of the Golden Horde.

As long as the Golden Horde doesn't have full control over Moldavia, or a Moldavia tag with full control over Moldavia.

You can just invent them though. No need to be 100% historically accurate

 

[ArVass]

Not to mention the ridiculous claim of some Western historians that they were of Provencal origin, I could write more about it because they way that theory formed is so interesting, but I have to go to the dentist now.

Maybe they were like "hmmm, yes, Honoré de Balšić"

 

[hightowel]

I said check the SOURCES on the Wiki article. And do you honestly dispute that a lot of historians believe that the Balsha were of Albanian origin? It is literally one of the main theories of their origin.

"The Albanian Balsa held the castle of Budva and owned their own ships between 1368 and 1389. On the one hand, Venice tolerated the piracy of these Albanian lords because of their anti-Ottoman position; on the other hand, their activity restricted its operations. Under Balsa III, who died in 1421, Zeta gained considerable independence in relation to the Despotate of Serbia, which had reinforced its rule over short stretches of the coast, between the Venetian dominions, from 1421 to 1459, the year in which it declined under the Ottoman advance. The same happened to the Balsa family, between the Albanian Plain and the hills as far as Shkodra."

Ivetic, Egidio (2022). History of the Adriatic: A Sea and Its Civilization. John Wiley & Sons

"The Balshas were probably of Albanian stock, but culturally Serbianized to a large degree: they had been Orthodox for a long time, and only converted to Catholicism once or twice for political reasons."

Malcolm 1999.

We can't say for sure what they are exactly, but you can't be intellectually honest and disregard the possibility of them being of Albanian origin, especially since so many historians certainly think that's the case.

And regarding Skanderbegs mother, she could have been a Serbian, but it's also possible that she was Bulgarian, or if Gjon Muzaka is to be believed, a member of the Muzaka family. It isn't really cut and dry that she was Serbian.

In any case, my original point still stands that you can't use a 14th century name list to determine the culture/ethnicity of a group of peopl

I said check the SOURCES on the Wiki article. And do you honestly dispute that a lot of historians believe that the Balsha were of Albanian origin? It is literally one of the main theories of their origin.

"The Albanian Balsa held the castle of Budva and owned their own ships between 1368 and 1389. On the one hand, Venice tolerated the piracy of these Albanian lords because of their anti-Ottoman position; on the other hand, their activity restricted its operations. Under Balsa III, who died in 1421, Zeta gained considerable independence in relation to the Despotate of Serbia, which had reinforced its rule over short stretches of the coast, between the Venetian dominions, from 1421 to 1459, the year in which it declined under the Ottoman advance. The same happened to the Balsa family, between the Albanian Plain and the hills as far as Shkodra."

Ivetic, Egidio (2022). History of the Adriatic: A Sea and Its Civilization. John Wiley & Sons

"The Balshas were probably of Albanian stock, but culturally Serbianized to a large degree: they had been Orthodox for a long time, and only converted to Catholicism once or twice for political reasons."

Malcolm 1999.

We can't say for sure what they are exactly, but you can't be intellectually honest and disregard the possibility of them being of Albanian origin, especially since so many historians certainly think that's the case.

And regarding Skanderbegs mother, she could have been a Serbian, but it's also possible that she was Bulgarian, or if Gjon Muzaka is to be believed, a member of the Muzaka family. It isn't really cut and dry that she was Serbian.

In any case, my original point still stands that you can't use a 14th century name list to determine the culture/ethnicity of a group of people.

My point about the Wikipedia article still stands, you can put whatever source you want to create a certain narative and concensus.

And as I said in my original post, the 14th c. name list isn't a reliable source in on itself, not sure why do you frame it as said it is.
Also, in the case you consider the Muzaka chronicle to be a reliable source then you would probably agree that the Balšići were of Provencal and Nemanjić (Serbian) origin

 

[hightowel]

Maybe they were like "hmmm, yes, Honoré de Balšić"

Tldr: Someone, or a few historians in the 15th, 16th c. mixed up the Beaux family and the Balšić, later on merging the symbols of their coat of arms. And later Western historians, the French in particular went on with it, instead of admitting how silly they look.

Also, shoutout to @Qafalia for mass downvoting all my posts without even writing anything himself

 

[Qafalia]

Tldr: Someone, or a few historians in the 15th, 16th c. mixed up the Beaux family and the Balšić, later on merging the symbols of their coat of arms. And later Western historians, the French in particular went on with it, instead of admitting how silly they look.

Also, shoutout to @Qafalia for mass downvoting all my posts without even writing anything himself

Just exercising my freedom of pressing buttons. Sorry if I hurt your feelings. I am mostly a lurker here.

 

[Uskana]

My point about the Wikipedia article still stands, you can put whatever source you want to create a certain narative and concensus.

And as I said in my original post, the 14th c. name list isn't a reliable source in on itself, not sure why do you frame it as said it is.
Also, in the case you consider the Muzaka chronicle to be a reliable source then you would probably agree that the Balšići were of Provencal and Nemanjić (Serbian) origin

I understand and agree with you that reading the wiki page itself is not necessarily reliable, but if you go through the sources and read what they say, they can be very reliable, and most sources on the Balsha page are from renowned historians. You can go through them and check for yourself.

And I didn't say that Gjon Muzaka is 100% a reliable source, but he did make some claims, I said that it is not known for a fact that Voisava was from a Serbian background, she could've been Serbian, Bulgarian or even Albanian. Do you think she 100% was a Serbian? How did you come to that conclusion? There isn't any historical document confirming her culture one way or another. She's almost like the Balsha, she could be many things, but we don't know what for sure.

But I want us all to be intellectually honest, and admit that the Balsha could very well have been Albanian. Hell, they could have been Serbian, or Vlach! I am not saying they definitely weren't! But a lot of historians do seem to think they were Albanian, and we can't discount that!

I mean, look how fast you declared Voisava to be Serbian, and we don't have any real meaningful sources claiming or confirming that.

 

[hightowel]

Just exercising my freedom of pressing buttons. Sorry if I hurt your feelings. I am mostly a lurker here.

I was inviting you to the conversation because you seem keen on the subject, in any case, feel free to press all the buttons that you want

 

[hightowel]

I understand and agree with you that reading the wiki page itself is not necessarily reliable, but if you go through the sources and read what they say, they can be very reliable, and most sources on the Balsha page are from renowned historians. You can go through them and check for yourself.

And I didn't say that Gjon Muzaka is 100% a reliable source, but he did make some claims, I said that it is not known for a fact that Voisava was from a Serbian background, she could've been Serbian, Bulgarian or even Albanian. Do you think she 100% was a Serbian? How did you come to that conclusion? There isn't any historical document confirming her culture one way or another. She's almost like the Balsha, she could be many things, but we don't know what for sure.

But I want us all to be intellectually honest, and admit that the Balsha could very well have been Albanian. Hell, they could have been Serbian, or Vlach! I am not saying they definitely weren't! But a lot of historians do seem to think they were Albanian, and we can't discount that!

I mean, look how fast you declared Voisava to be Serbian, and we don't have any real meaningful sources claiming or confirming that.

What I am saying is that you could put names of credible historians only in the Wikipedia page but the article can still be one sided. For example, I could quote only credible historians on the article that claim Balšić were Serbian such as B. Osswald, S. Papageorgiou, P. Bartl, J. FIne, S. Stefanescu, and other credible non Serbian historians. On the other hand, I could only quote historians that say the Balšić were Vlach like A. Dabinović, V. Ćorović, M. Gecić, S. Ćirković, M. Cazacu, Z. Mirdita and create a completely different narrative. Thus, Wikipedia articles are prone to creating false scientific consensus.

I know you didn't say that Muzaka was completely reliable, I said if you were willing to trust him on one point, it is likely to trust him on another, though not 100% of course. What I said of the mother of Skenderbeg was in context that Serbians have the right to research the history of Skenderbeg for his mother could have been Serbian, or even Skenderbeg himself, according to the Muzaka chronicle, Skenderbeg had a Serbian "nature", Chroniques gréco-romanes inédites ou peu connues, p. 334. But my point is not that he is Serbian, but that Serbians have the right to research him. And thus you have the right to say the Balšić were Albanian and to research them further and present your argument. I am quite confident they were Serbian or Vlach, but I will not deny that they have been called Albanian in certain contexts.

Also, my rebuttal was aimed at you saying that they were likely Albanian or maybe Albanian-Serbian. I have no intention to insult you or annoy you by replying, I just wanted to present my side of the argument just so that Paradox Tinto sees both sides

 

[Qafalia]

I was inviting you to the conversation because you seem keen on the subject, in any case, feel free to press all the buttons that you want

I am really not that knowledgeable to get into a discussion, so I will rather just continue reading and pressing all the buttons.

 

[Mingmung]

Dukagjini should probably be Dukagjin, no? Doesn't the -i signify a familyname? I guess it's a castle? I wonder why this has been chosen as a location, as this wasn't even the capital of that family. It's basically a very small village nowadays.

I'm currently going over Albania, and I think it needs some extra love, and tags (not necessarily more locations). I hope some can help. The Angevin Kingdom shouldn't control that much territory, either. Only Bouthroton and Durres.

 

[Uskana]

What I am saying is that you could put names of credible historians only in the Wikipedia page but the article can still be one sided. For example, I could quote only credible historians on the article that claim Balšić were Serbian such as B. Osswald, S. Papageorgiou, P. Bartl, J. FIne, S. Stefanescu, and other credible non Serbian historians. On the other hand, I could only quote historians that say the Balšić were Vlach like A. Dabinović, V. Ćorović, M. Gecić, S. Ćirković, M. Cazacu, Z. Mirdita and create a completely different narrative. Thus, Wikipedia articles are prone to creating false scientific consensus.

I know you didn't say that Muzaka was completely reliable, I said if you were willing to trust him on one point, it is likely to trust him on another, though not 100% of course. What I said of the mother of Skenderbeg was in context that Serbians have the right to research the history of Skenderbeg for his mother could have been Serbian, or even Skenderbeg himself, according to the Muzaka chronicle, Skenderbeg had a Serbian "nature", Chroniques gréco-romanes inédites ou peu connues, p. 334. But my point is not that he is Serbian, but that Serbians have the right to research him. And thus you have the right to say the Balšić were Albanian and to research them further and present your argument. I am quite confident they were Serbian or Vlach, but I will not deny that they have been called Albanian in certain contexts.

Also, my rebuttal was aimed at you saying that they were likely Albanian or maybe Albanian-Serbian. I have no intention to insult you or annoy you by replying, I just wanted to present my side of the argument just so that Paradox Tinto sees both sides

I don't necessarily trust Muzaka on that point, I'm just saying that it isn't really historical fact that Voisava was a Serbian from the Brankovic family, it's one possibility out of several possibilities, the others being a Bulgarian origin and an Albanian one. But this is irrelevant to the main discussion. And let's not get into if Skanderbeg is Albanian or Serbian lol, it has been discussed to death everywhere and I think anyone who is honest knows that he was not Serbian, he might have had partial Serbian ancestry, but we know that medieval Albanian society was patriarchal (still is tbf lol), so even if his mother was Serbian or Bulgarian that wouldn't change much. Stefan Dusan's mother was a Bulgarian, but he is considered a Serbian regardless.

We're just going to have to agree to disagree about the Balsha family, I think there is a good possibility that they are of Albanian origin, but they might not be, I'm not ruling anything out. But as long as there are credible, renowned historians who think that, it is worthy of being considered and shouldn't be disregarded so quickly.

Also, I agree with you that anyone should be able to research anything, we shouldn't gate keep history research.

And don't worry, I in no way find it offensive or insulting for you to reply to me and present your opinions, I think it's a good thing to have these discussions, as long as we're not at each others throats, and as long as we remain intellectually honest.

 

[HUNTemplar]

Are the Csangos present?

Csangos would be an interesting addition via events, but they were not present IRL until mid-1700s unfortunately.

 

[HUNTemplar]

I know they said the map of Hungary will be reworked until release, and that's good, because it is so wrong rn on multiple levels.

Firstly, the terrain of modern-day Hungary is a joke. I know outsiders know it as all flat, but it is not, and it's pretty clearly visible from a simple map as well. Most of whole Transdanubia should be hills , and many parts of modern-day Northern Hungary as well. Secondly, these hilly provinces should be of woods terrain, as Hungary was heavily forested at the time. I would therefore reassign the Transdanubian farmland as well to other West Hungarian provinces.

There are many problems with the trade goods as well, as prodicing livestock was heavily present on the Great Plain, and it is nonexistent on this map in that region. Legumes should be removed completely in favor of fruits, wheat and livestock, and wool should be reduced as well. Also, Hungary is a country well known for its wine culture, and right now only Békés produces wine, which is all wrong, because never at any point in history was wine produced in Békés. On the other hand, Syrmia, Veszprém, Küküllő and Zemplén should produce wine, and later, as the technology to make red wine comes to Hungary from Serbia, Baranya and Eger should also become wine producers via events. Also, Belmura should produce clay.

Lastly, what is Belmura? Slovene minority should be removed from Hungary completely. Otherwise, the map is almost nailed, but I would recommend making it more predominantly Hungarian, especially in modern-day Slovakia, with the addition that Pozsony/Bratislava/Pressburg was never majority Slovakian until 1930s, it was Hungarian until some point, but became German for a much longer time because of Habsburg influence. The huge influx of minorities should be depicted via tons of early-game (Romanians and Serbians) and mid-game events (Romanians, Serbians, Croats, Germans, Slovaks, Romani, Rusyns, Polish, Jews) which would be triggered by wars in the Balkan region and Poland.

 

[Linbot#6018]

The huge influx of minorities should be depicted via tons of early-game (Romanians and Serbians) and mid-game events (Romanians, Serbians, Croats, Germans, Slovaks, Romani, Rusyns, Polish, Jews) which would be triggered by wars in the Balkan region and Poland.

I would hope that the game's population simulation is good enough that depopulation and migration like this from warfare can be simulated without railroading.

 

[ArVass]

Csangos would be an interesting addition via events, but they were not present IRL until mid-1700s unfortunately.

They are tricky because there are multiple Csángó groups and their origin ranges from unknown to questionable. By the 1700s date I think you mean the group of Székelys who left Transylvania in 1764 after the Mádéfalva massacre and joined the Csángós. But there were in fact Csángós in Moldavia as far back as the 13th century, though, so I think it would be a fun addition (although I don't think a separate culture is needed, I think sprinkling in some of Hungarian or Székely Catholics in Băcau, Roman, Adjud (probably founded by Hungarians), and Târgu Neamț (probably founded by Saxon settlers, so should probably be at least partially German/Transylvanian Saxon) would be great detail)

 

[Silverbow]

I know they said the map of Hungary will be reworked until release, and that's good, because it is so wrong rn on multiple levels.

Firstly, the terrain of modern-day Hungary is a joke. I know outsiders know it as all flat, but it is not, and it's pretty clearly visible from a simple map as well. Most of whole Transdanubia should be hills , and many parts of modern-day Northern Hungary as well. Secondly, these hilly provinces should be of woods terrain, as Hungary was heavily forested at the time. I would therefore reassign the Transdanubian farmland as well to other West Hungarian provinces.

LOL no.

Anything that can even remotely be called hills in the red.

There are many problems with the trade goods as well, as prodicing livestock was heavily present on the Great Plain, and it is nonexistent on this map in that region. Legumes should be removed completely in favor of fruits, wheat and livestock, and wool should be reduced as well. Also, Hungary is a country well known for its wine culture, and right now only Békés produces wine, which is all wrong, because never at any point in history was wine produced in Békés. On the other hand, Syrmia, Veszprém, Küküllő and Zemplén should produce wine, and later, as the technology to make red wine comes to Hungary from Serbia, Baranya and Eger should also become wine producers via events. Also, Belmura should produce clay.

Agree on the wine.

Lastly, what is Belmura? Slovene minority should be removed from Hungary completely. Otherwise, the map is almost nailed, but I would recommend making it more predominantly Hungarian, especially in modern-day Slovakia, with the addition that Pozsony/Bratislava/Pressburg was never majority Slovakian until 1930s, it was Hungarian until some point, but became German for a much longer time because of Habsburg influence. The huge influx of minorities should be depicted via tons of early-game (Romanians and Serbians) and mid-game events (Romanians, Serbians, Croats, Germans, Slovaks, Romani, Rusyns, Polish, Jews) which would be triggered by wars in the Balkan region and Poland.

City of Pressburg may have been mostly German with Slovak and Hungarian minorities, but the county in total was mostly Slovak & Hungarian. If anything, making the area Slovak/Hungarian would make more sense.

 

[markthebest1141]

I have one problem, Baia Mare is Nagy Bánya in hungarian and at that time it was almost pure hungarian population.

 

[ArVass]

LOL no.
View attachment 1163269
Anything that can even remotely be called hills in the red.

I mean tbf that's still like 5 different locations that could/should be hills, though it would be much easier represented with smaller locations and more granularity as currently the locations themselves also cover huge areas with varied terrain that's mostly flat

 

[Mingmung]

Regarding Lesbos (which might actually part of next week's Aegaen discussion):

- I recently advocated to merge its two locations, as one was named after the whole island and another to its capital town. This was in the Anatolia-thread.
- There's a way to keep the split, as that would be more in line with the location-density of other islands.
View attachment 1163427
1: Rename Lésbos into Kalloni and give it the Salt-tradegood Mitiléne currently has (it had Lésbos' saltpans which are currently attributed to the Mitilene-location). It was a Byzantine settlement, even has some Ottoman architecture and was continually inhabited.
2: Mitiléne is fine, but should be given the Wine- or Olives-tradegood instead of Salt.
EDIT: 3: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mithymna the town/fortress of Mythimna is also an (even better) option than Kalloni, as it was a Kaza during Ottoman times. I forgot this was basically Lésbos' second town for a very long while.

That's enough map-staring for today.

I edited the post above. Mythimna is actually the second-biggest town of Lésbos, it could keep the Salt-tradegood of Kalloni's saltpans, though.