• 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.

Phystarstk

Major
117 Badges
Jun 6, 2003
755
0
Visit site
  • Teleglitch: Die More Edition
  • Lead and Gold
  • The Kings Crusade
  • Magicka
  • Majesty 2
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Rome Gold
  • Sengoku
  • Sword of the Stars
  • Sword of the Stars II
  • Supreme Ruler 2020
  • Knights of Pen and Paper +1 Edition
  • The Showdown Effect
  • Victoria 2
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Warlock: Master of the Arcane
  • War of the Roses
  • 200k Club
  • 500k Club
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Knight (pre-order)
  • Elven Legacy Collection
  • Europa Universalis 4: Emperor
  • Divine Wind
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Deus Vult
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis III: Chronicles
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • For The Glory
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Hearts of Iron III Collection
  • Heir to the Throne
I was just wondering if it would be possible to "de-anglicize" south Britain (the region currently known as England). Like, if Welsh or Breton monarchs conquered England, could they re-celtify those lands over a loooonnnggg period? It probably couldnt happen in real life, but I'd love to pull that off in the game.
 
Well, I believe it's been stated that culture does gradually change over time in conquered regions, so I'd think it would be possible. However, you have to be careful, because I think I also read a while ago that if you conquer too much of another culture, and have more of that culture than your original culture, your state culture will gradually change to the conquered culture. ;)
 
If I recall correctly cultural differences will play a role in serf loyality.

So if you do conquer southern England the timing might be more important. If for instance in 1066 the cultural balance still has a high percent of "celts" as the populace your longterm success for conversion is higher.

If you wait though those celts begin to convert themselves to the new cultural type and then population values come into play. From what I remember reading in the Faq thge higher population the greater chance you have to be assimilated to the new conquered populations culture, dependant also on the prestige of your particular dynasty.

Seems to be one of the more dynamic parts of the game, particularly if you begin to conquest abroad, and you occupy. On the one hand you may get prestige points for crusading, but it might be one hell of a struggle to keep conquered lands happy, as it should be.

This dynamic of the game though will make MP very intresting, if your a savy player and are building a dynasty via economics, land an power and prestige a distant last then it might be easier to attack like minded cultures for the ease of thier management. Something I will be intrested to see how its handled.
 
In 1066 England was so thoroughly Scandinavised that the English passed as Scandinavians (the Russians regarded them as Vikings and so did the Byzantines).

The effects of this scandinavisation that neutralised the differences between the "Danish toungue" and Anglo-saxon is still visible in English (they, them, take, give, sister, egg, etc.)

If Sweden (I, in CK) was to put history right and do what Harald failed to do, shouldn't the ethnicity of England change to Scandinavian faster than it would in Spain for example?
 
Originally posted by Conrad
If Sweden (I, in CK) was to put history right and do what Harald failed to do, shouldn't the ethnicity of England change to Scandinavian faster than it would in Spain for example?

I would think that this would be the effect, historically speaking. It's just that given the lack of recent information on the project, I have to wonder how well it will simulate effects such as these....
 
Originally posted by Conrad
In 1066 England was so thoroughly Scandinavised that the English passed as Scandinavians (the Russians regarded them as Vikings and so did the Byzantines).


The Byzantines were notoriously bad at classifying north Europeans correctly. True, English exiles could and did serve in the Varangian Guard.

The effects of this scandinavisation that neutralised the differences between the "Danish toungue" and Anglo-saxon is still visible in English (they, them, take, give, sister, egg, etc.)

Hardly 'neutralised'. ON did influence OE but they remained entirely distinct languages.

If Sweden (I, in CK) was to put history right and do what Harald failed to do, shouldn't the ethnicity of England change to Scandinavian faster than it would in Spain for example?

I think a better reflection would be a la Empires of the Middle Ages where it's easier to rule a province of related culture.
 
Originally posted by snuggs
I think a better reflection would be a la Empires of the Middle Ages where it's easier to rule a province of related culture.

But I believe there is supposed to be a feature in the game where conquered lands can and do change ethnicity over time, gradually.
 
Originally posted by snuggs
Hardly 'neutralised'. ON did influence OE but they remained entirely distinct languages.

I am not so sure about this. It is true that they were to have different destinies evolving into the languages they are today, but can we be sure that the Anglo-saxons and the Vikings regarded their languages as "entirely distinct"? The Scandinavian languages of today are legally distinct but they are not experienced by Scandinavians or scholars as such. Vikings and Anglo-saxons spoke to each other in their own languages as Scandinavians still do.

Snorri Sturlusson wrote "In England there are still place names in another language than ours". He surely did not mean that Anglo-saxon was the "other language". He meant that there were still Celtic place names.

It was probably the fact that the languages were so close that account for the influence of Scandinavian on English. There was later a similar influence from Low German on the Scandinavian languages .
 
Originally posted by snuggs
Bah! Why do everyone's fantasies involve beasting the English :)

It's tough being a Saxon revanchist.

Well the Anglo-Normans did make a lot of enemies in the past 1000 years, you can't blame some of us for wantign revenge...if only in the form of a video game :)
 
Originally posted by Conrad

It was probably the fact that the languages were so close that account for the influence of Scandinavian on English. There was later a similar influence from Low German on the Scandinavian languages .

Old English is a member of the Low Germanic family and is very closely related to Dutch, Flemish, and Old Norse as well as Old Low German. English would later be greatly transformed by the Norman invasion and would become a Germano-Romance hybrid. However even Old English was distinct from the other Low German languages(it was further from Old Norse and Swedish and Norwegian are from one another; the two languages, for instance, had highly differant inflections.) although it would be easily learned and understandable to other members of the same family.

If you don't believe me that its differant just read Beowulf and some old Sagas :)b
 
Originally posted by snuggs
Bah! Why do everyone's fantasies involve beasting the English :)

It's tough being a Saxon revanchist.

'cause it's fun! :)
 
Originally posted by Marcus Valerius
Bah! I don't need any help! With the Byzantine Empire, I'll have southern Britian speaking Greek within a hundred years! ;) :cool:


[ROFL] This is hilarious! [/ROFL]:D
 
Originally posted by DanielMcCollum
Old English is a member of the Low Germanic family and is very closely related to Dutch, Flemish, and Old Norse as well as Old Low German. English would later be greatly transformed by the Norman invasion and would become a Germano-Romance hybrid. However even Old English was distinct from the other Low German languages(it was further from Old Norse and Swedish and Norwegian are from one another; the two languages, for instance, had highly differant inflections.) although it would be easily learned and understandable to other members of the same family.

If you don't believe me that its differant just read Beowulf and some old Sagas :)b

I know this. That is why I wrote that the changes that took part in the English language were neutralising the differences.

The inflectional system was different, so what happened? The English dropped or adapted their inflectional system.

Words having different meanings (false friends) adapted their meanings to Scandinavian, like _dream_ which meant "wish" in Anglo-saxon. _Draumr_ in Scandinavian meant "dream" so what happened? As _dream_ and _draumr_ were felt to be the same word, _dream_ changed meaning.

_Systir_ and _Sweostor_ were felt to be the same word giving us _sister_.

Very rarely does a language borrow words such as _they_ and _them_ or _take_ and _give_, or _egg_ and _are_. It is extremely rare that the borrowing of such basic words occur between separate languages. It is common though that dialects borrow such forms (that is why they remain dialects).:)

I'd say that in those days there were three major languages in western Europe: Germanic, Slavic and Romance. Within these three languages there were major dialects that were evolving into separate languages.

Let's say that a contemporary Picardois would go to southern Spain or southern Italy.
A Norwegian from northern Norway would at the same time go to Switzerland or to Wessex.
A Wend would go to from present-day Hamburg to Novgorod or Northern Greece.

When arriving to these destinations, the three people might have had difficulties understanding the local dialects, but during the voyage they would never have met a language barrier. They would have noticed that the way people spoke had changed a little when passing a forest or a river, but the language would have changed slowly and he would have learnt the differences as he went.
 
Last edited:
Originally posted by Conrad
Words having different meanings (false friends) adapted their meanings to Scandinavian, like _dream_ which meant "wish" in Anglo-saxon.

That or 'joy'. And 'swaefn' for 'dream' survived in common use until the time of Langland. It's not unknown to hear 'sweven' for 'sleep' in Northumberland to this day :cool: