Alternate names for provinces

[Ruwaard]

In the Middle Ages? No, certainly not. England had Germanic and French (Norman and Angevin) rulers, yes; but the former were the native inhabitants of England and of course stopped ruling themselves after 1066; while the latter held the throne for the entire game timeframe. There certainly weren't any Dutch rulers... Are you thinking of William III?

Wales never had German rulers--unless you want to count Anglicized Normans. It was conquered by force.

And why do you assume it would work the same way in Wales? Or, indeed, any Western European realm?

Because it could happen and it did. The kingdom of Sicily was ruled by Normans, Germans, French and Aragonese, both Castille-Leon and Portugal had their own house of Burgundy (the former was from the free county and the latter from the duchy). Poland had native, Czech, German, French and Lithuanian dynasties.
And towards the end of the timeframe of the game, various parts of the Low Countries were united by the French house of Valois Burgundy.
Scotland is an example were originally foreign dynasties went 'native' (Bruce (Norman) and Stuart (Breton)).

The main point is that it could happen, although IMO it should not lead to different province names for each culture. OTOH I do like the option, to change certain province names depending on which scenario. (The Dyfed, Pembroke example).

 

[unmerged(75409)]

You mean the teutonic attack on the Grand duchy of Lithuania and the prussian tribes?

East Prussia was not deserted or anything when the germans decided to attack...

I mean the process of town-founding and land consolidation, that took place after native or German rulers gave land grants and communal rights to settlers from Germany, Netherlands etc... those led to cultural shifts which might make sense to lead to province name changes.

 

[ZhugeKongming]

Because it could happen and it did. The kingdom of Sicily was ruled by Normans, Germans, French and Aragonese, both Castille-Leon and Portugal had their own house of Burgundy (the former was from the free county and the latter from the duchy). Poland had native, Czech, German, French and Lithuanian dynasties.
And towards the end of the timeframe of the game, various parts of the Low Countries were united by the French house of Valois Burgundy.
Scotland is an example were originally foreign dynasties went 'native' (Bruce (Norman) and Stuart (Breton)).

The main point is that it could happen, although IMO it should not lead to different province names for each culture. OTOH I do like the option, to change certain province names depending on which scenario. (The Dyfed, Pembroke example).

Yes, obviously 'international' inheritance/election happened (election was a more common way for this to happen, not inheritance, btw). I was never disputing that. But galuska seemed to be suggesting that it happened commonly to every country. This is patently untrue. He's extrapolating a larger trend from the rather extreme example of Hungary, and completely ignoring the relative dynastic stability of, say, France or England.

And this is all beside the point I originally made, which is that it's ridiculous to talk of this happening to Wales.

 

[BonSequitur]

It's not really ridiculous for Wales to be as unstable, dynastically, as Hungary was. It would be extreme, and rare, but it should happen some of the time, depending on a lot of factors, like dynastic ties between the Welsh rulers and the timing of king and heir deaths.

It's not implausible for England, for example, to fall under a foreign dynasty. This didn't happen in English history without some 'nudge' (The Dutch king William was put in place by a Parliament-backed revolution, and ruled alongside his wife Mary; the house of Hannover came into power because Catholics were prohibited from inheriting, again by Parliament) and France never had a foreign ruler, but those situations were certainly conceivable. There's nothing that made France or England inherently 'stable' during the period, and of course, England starts the period with a difficult, forced dynastic change.

 

[ZhugeKongming]

Wales was certainly dynastically unstable but that's also completely irrelevant to this discussion, since what we're actually discussing is the ridiculousness of a hypothetical scenario where Polish lords inherit lands in Wales. The kind of hypothetical scenario that happens in CK quite often.

Please don't use examples from outside of the time period, it's not really relevant.

 

[Drachenfire]

With the exception of Gwynedd for this era, Wales wasn't dynastically unstable by any measure. Of the four principalities c. 1064, three were headed by the dynastically senior heir for each realm: Dinefwr for Deheubarth, Mathrafal for Powys, and Morgan(nwg) for Glamorgan. The Mathrafal occupied Gwynedd for a time until Gruffydd ap Cynan was able to restore the Aberffraw family to that realm.

Following the Norman invasions of Wales 1068-1100, all but the Morgannwg of Glamorgan retained possession of their ancestrial lands, and succession progressed in accordance with Welsh law and custom until the Edwardian conquest of Wales in 1284.

In the March.. that is the 1/3 of Wales under Anglo-Norman occupation, in those regions there was a high rate of turnover of dynasties as it was like the wild wild west, or the outremer, in terms of the slaughter committed to retain control of those lands.

 

[unmerged(84239)]

He's extrapolating a larger trend from the rather extreme example of Hungary, and completely ignoring the relative dynastic stability of, say, France or England.

And this is all beside the point I originally made, which is that it's ridiculous to talk of this happening to Wales.

It is a game which doesn't necesserily follow history.

IRL foreign kings ruled in Hungary, Poland, Bohemia, Scotland, Sicily/Naples, Ireland, Wales, the Levant, Lesser Armenia... Sometimes by conquest, sometimes be election, sometimes by inheritance.

In a game, where only the start date setup is historical, Wales, England, France, HRE shouldn't be defended from a possible prussian/croat/basque/etc inheritance.


I also never said that it was common, I just gave an example that it could have happened. Why is it stranger to imagine a polish count in wales then a spanish count in hungary or a normann prince in lesser armenia?

edit: especially since you don't play Wales, Apulia or Hungary, but you play dynasties.

 

[unmerged(75409)]

Taking over powerful kingdoms as a foreigner was one of the biggest fun things in CK1. Emperor Boleslaw Piast of Germany... Theodoros Komnenos, king of Egypt... Anglo-Saxon dukes of Normandy... that was fun, especially when the AI did it!

I saw a Russian becoming king of Hungary, leading to civil war and the splintering of the kingdom... but then one of his sons had become Hungarian, and he reunited the kingdom... that was a fun thing, too. Cultural change happened to dynasties quite often and it would eventually "correct" those situations. I.e. the Polish dynasty in Wales would go native and only their last name would ever show where they came from. Of course when a Pole takes over Germany, and relocates the capital to a Polish province, then it's Germany's turn to slowly become Polish.

Under elective law, you could "penalize" foreigners so that they don't get elected unless they are super-powerful already... that could make some realms more resistant to foreign intruders.