Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

Forging your own nation

Jump to latest Follow Reply
  • 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.
unmerged(8303)

unmerged(8303)

Henri II Valois
Mar 19, 2002
2.046
0
www.europa-universalis.com
Ok. I have browsed these forums and as always there is the danger of creating a thread thats already been discussed. If this is the case, I'm sorry. :)

But what I would like to know/get comments on is the likelyhood of creating your own "nation"

That is, if there are several levels of nobility is it possible for a duchy or whatnot that was historically a duchy to become a kingdom?

After Constantinople was sacked I think some areas become kingdoms in their own right..or at least despotates..


If your overlord is squashed might it be feasible for you to take the advantage to raise your status?

Or were these gains in name only?

Is a kingdom supported by england in southern france a reasonable possibility if the French crown were crushed in the style of the eastern empire 4th crusade?
 
Well I don't know how they plan to set it up in the game, but I will comment on the historicity of your post.

There really is no such thing as a nation in feudal society. The modern idea of a nation evolved out of linguistic, religious, and political distinctions among the various principalities, counties, and duchies that mad up the feudal landscape.

In simple terms a duchy cannot become a kingdom, because it IS a duchy. Its noble house, however, could rise to the throne. In which case, it [the duchy] is simply the ancestral lands of the King, who could if he wished, retain his title of duke while holding the crown as well.

But a kingdom or a princedom is not a nation, at least not like we experience them. I think it was the historian and medievalist Hilaire Belloc who said that you can only view western medieval civilization in one of two ways; either as one big nation, or a bunch infinitesimally small ones. A medieval kingdom is not so much a national reality as it is a philosophical, and religious one. It is a collection of territories, for the most part all self sufficient and often independently minded, who, either out of tradition or political reality/necessity, claim a unified authority in the form of a symbolic circular piece of metal. Although seemingly contradictory, a Kingdom doesn't have a King because it's a Kingdom; It's a kingdom BECAUSE it has a king.

Is a kingdom supported by england in southern france a reasonable possibility if the French crown were crushed in the style of the eastern empire 4th crusade?
Click to expand...
.

In reality, no. Unless the English felt they could resurrect the old Gothic crown of Toulouse, that Clovis dissolved a long time ago, and get away with it. In theory any territory that was traditionally subject to the French crown would always be subject to it, even if the English crown controlled it. A Christian crown can't be crushed by another Christian monarch and disappear altogether (The Empire didn't disappear until the Sultan crushed it). A medieval crown can only be usurped, or combined (as the English did try to do) by another Christian monarch.
 
Originally posted by Jaron
I see. Very informative. Thank you.

But couldn't an area detach itself from a crown and declare itself a kingdom in its own right?
Click to expand...
In this era you could only "become king" by Papal appoval. There are only a few examples of "new" kingdoms...


I'm sure thats very in line with the goals of the Burgundian dukes.
Click to expand...
That was a bit later though... IIRC they were trying to resurrect an old crown (Burgundy was a kingdom once), not get a new one.
 
Oh, you are 100% right Havard. They were after the old kingdom of Burgundy or Lotharingia.

The only kingdom I can think of that was created was the Kingdom of Naples..or was it Sicily. But that was by papal decree..

could the emperor of the holy roman emperor raise an area of the empire to the status of kingdom? I have a small book of medieval maps that lists the duchy of bohemia at earlier dates then the kingdom of bohemia later on. Something happened there.

But even if you can't create new crowns, couldnt you detatch yourself from a crown and stand on your own, or instead switch lords?

If I am a landowner in france subordinate to the french king and I pledge loyalty to the king of england am I still the french king's vassal? Not in game since we dont know but in reality.

I'm not sure though since the english kings were still technically vassals of the french king. In name only though.
 
"In theory any territory that was traditionally subject to the French crown would always be subject to it, even if the English crown controlled it."

Not really. After the peace of Bretigny the english possessions were released from the french Kingdom, legally formalised by the Parlement striking those provinces out of its "registry" (list for court days etc).

Another example is an agreement between Aragon and France (around 1240 or so) where the french King ended his (very theoretical) overlordship over the County Barcelona.

Bohemia became a Kingdom, though I'm not sure about the details. On the iberian peninsula, Castile and Portugal emerged from Counties to Kingdoms; same with Aragon IIRC splitting from Navarra.

I would be interested in playing Catalonia/Aragon or Tolosa and unite the two. There should be a way to get provinces out of a kingdom, but to become King it should be the classic way - inherit a Kingdom, or the special historic cases.

On a related issue, has anyone heard anything whether there is a possibility to form a Union of your possessions ? Or is that just by you being in possession of them....
 
Originally posted by Jaron
Oh, you are 100% right Havard. They were after the old kingdom of Burgundy or Lotharingia.

The only kingdom I can think of that was created was the Kingdom of Naples..or was it Sicily. But that was by papal decree..
Click to expand...
We had a thread about this a little while back... (here).


could the emperor of the holy roman emperor raise an area of the empire to the status of kingdom? I have a small book of medieval maps that lists the duchy of bohemia at earlier dates then the kingdom of bohemia later on. Something happened there.
Click to expand...
The Emperor has to agree I guess, but without the Pope - no crown...


But even if you can't create new crowns, couldnt you detatch yourself from a crown and stand on your own, or instead switch lords?
Click to expand...
As a feudal lord the lands are not yours to detatch though... They belong to the king, and you as his vassal keep them for him. Trying to swear fealty to a different liege for the same land would be a nasty break with th eperiod's feudal mindset...


If I am a landowner in france subordinate to the french king and I pledge loyalty to the king of england am I still the french king's vassal? Not in game since we dont know but in reality.
Click to expand...
The vassalage goes with the land. As a holder of French land you are a vassal to the French crown. The French king will still consider that land as his, and you as his vassal. If you break your oath to him he should be free to install a new vassal in your place... (unless you are powerful enough to convince him otherwise ;))


I'm not sure though since the english kings were still technically vassals of the french king. In name only though.
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by Havard

As a feudal lord the lands are not yours to detatch though... They belong to the king, and you as his vassal keep them for him. Trying to swear fealty to a different liege for the same land would be a nasty break with th eperiod's feudal mindset...

Click to expand...

It didn't always work that way though. In the 12th century, the kings of Aragon had vassals in southern France (which theoretically made them french vassals, but before the Albigensian wars the french king was thoroughly ignored in the south). When France expanded eastward, the territory it gained was excluded from the empire (or the respective kingdom, like Arelat/Burgundy), as in the case of Daupiné or Lyonnais.
 
Originally posted by el Cerimoniós
It didn't always work that way though. In the 12th century, the kings of Aragon had vassals in southern France (which theoretically made them french vassals, but before the Albigensian wars the french king was thoroughly ignored in the south). When France expanded eastward, the territory it gained was excluded from the empire (or the respective kingdom, like Arelat/Burgundy), as in the case of Daupiné or Lyonnais.
Click to expand...
Yes. That is correct. One could say that the borderline between France and Aragon was a bit floating - but that was nothing new. Catalonia itself was a French fief once (and I believe still was, if only in theory).

The French expansion in the HRE comes under my other comment: unless you are powerful enough to convince him otherwise...
 
"Catalonia itself was a French fief once (and I believe still was, if only in theory)."

Yup. If I may quote myself: "Another example is an agreement between Aragon and France (around 1240 or so) where the french King ended his (very theoretical) overlordship over the County Barcelona."

"The French expansion in the HRE comes under my other comment: unless you are powerful enough to convince him otherwise..."

Sure, but the French also had a legal doctrine to back it up, rex imperator in regno suo.... which was also followed in EU2... :)

I'm just curious how rigid the feudal rules will be in the game, or whether they allow for the flexibilities that can be observed in history....
 
But are you going to be able to play a subordinate dynasty? Everyone talks about breaking away from your overlord, but my impression was that you are going to be the overlord.:)
 
Originally posted by Jaron
Oh, you are 100% right Havard. They were after the old kingdom of Burgundy or Lotharingia.

The only kingdom I can think of that was created was the Kingdom of Naples..or was it Sicily. But that was by papal decree..

could the emperor of the holy roman emperor raise an area of the empire to the status of kingdom? I have a small book of medieval maps that lists the duchy of bohemia at earlier dates then the kingdom of bohemia later on. Something happened there.

But even if you can't create new crowns, couldnt you detatch yourself from a crown and stand on your own, or instead switch lords?

If I am a landowner in france subordinate to the french king and I pledge loyalty to the king of england am I still the french king's vassal? Not in game since we dont know but in reality.

I'm not sure though since the english kings were still technically vassals of the french king. In name only though.
Click to expand...

There were many kingdoms formally created either during of just before the CK period: many of the Iberian kingdoms, Sicily, Poland, Bohemia, the Scandinavian kingdoms, the Crusader states of Jerusalem and Thessalonica. Even Sardinia was created a kingdom for the son of the HRE Friedirch I (which much, much later allowed the Dukes of Savoy to give themselves a kingly title). So advancing yourself to King shouldn't be impossible in game terms, as long as you have a large area under your control for quite some time - and it will probably be best if you can find an old royal title lying vacant to resurrect...

And Jaron - there was NO formal kingdom of Naples until Napoleonic times, when it was created for Joseph Bonaparte and Joachim Murat. Before that, there were actually two kingdoms of Sicily, one on the island and one on the mainland (which was conventionally, but incorrectly, known as the Kingdom of Naples), as a result fo the splitting of the kingdom after the Siclian Vespers. That is why the later reunited kingdom was known as the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies...
 
Let's see. The Burgundian dukes wanted to become kings, so there's an example. The Kings in Spain were certainly a development; as was Bohemia and Sicily, which were mentioned.

Hmm I think, essentially, you should be able to buy the title of king form the pope or from the emperor.
 
Originally posted by el Cerimoniós
Not really. After the peace of Bretigny the english possessions were released from the french Kingdom, legally formalised by the Parlement striking those provinces out of its "registry" (list for court days etc).
Click to expand...

The treaty of Bértigny did not cede all English controlled lands to the English crown, it forced the French crown to renounce its claim to Aquitaine (the English crown also gave up its claim to Normandy and Anjou). If through some agreement a crown renounces it's claim to a previously held land then that land and lord become independent. In the case of Aquitaine, its lord was the "Black Prince," so it would default to the English crown. The treaty itself was an unusual situation, the result of the French king's imprisonment in England after the battle of Poitiers. In any case, the treaty of Bértigny is simply an example that proves my point; just because the English controlled it doesn't mean it wasn't subject to the French crown. They had to make the French crown give up its claim.

Another example is an agreement between Aragon and France (around 1240 or so) where the french King ended his (very theoretical) overlordship over the County Barcelona.
Click to expand...

Again same point, the crown who in theory controls must agree to relinquish claim. Why (if it was so theoretical) did Aragon fell it needed France to give up it's claim.

On the iberian peninsula, Castile and Portugal emerged from Counties to Kingdoms; same with Aragon IIRC splitting from Navarra.
Click to expand...

Spain is the most unusual situation. It might be better to think of the kingdoms of Spain as Crusader states in the sense that there wasn't any tradition to base the authority of a crown on. They pretty much had to wing it as far as developing the traditions of their Kingdoms political divisions.

On a related issue, has anyone heard anything whether there is a possibility to form a Union of your possessions ? Or is that just by you being in possession of them....
Click to expand...

What kind of Union do you mean? A Union of states for the sake of a united government is anachronistic and totally contrary to the medieval mindset.
 
Originally posted by The Leper King
.

In reality, no. Unless the English felt they could resurrect the old Gothic crown of Toulouse, that Clovis dissolved a long time ago, and get away with it.
Click to expand...

Why do that? Why not attempt to resurrect the Carolingian Kingdom of Aquitaine instead? Much more recent and more appropriate to the lands ruled...
 
so in reality at least, defeated and annexed lands didnt lose their crowns or such but merely had them transferred?

crowns cannot be destroyed unless its a situtation like sultan->byzantium?

Was there never annexations of areas that led to a crown being dissolved? Or did the conquerer always take the title for themself?

the only case I can think of takes place way after CK is over, and almost at the end of EU :p

that being the partition of poland. I don't recall the Russians, Prussians or Austrians taking the title King of Poland. But that's in the age of centralized nation states and I believe monarchies and crowns had different meanings and purposes. Feudalism was long gone.

I don't think its an applicable example but its the only one I could think of :p
 
Originally posted by Demetrios
Why do that? Why not attempt to resurrect the Carolingian Kingdom of Aquitaine instead? Much more recent and more appropriate to the lands ruled...
Click to expand...

Neither is really plausible. The Kingdom of Aquitaine was a specific product of gavelkind. Whereas the Gothic Kingdom was a crown of antique tradition. In fact the Kingdom of Aquitaine had it's capitol in Toulouse, so it could be argued that "Charlie the Big" was creating a gavelkind Kingdom where there was precedent for one. But it makes no sense, since the King of England already held the title of Aquitaine it would be odd to claim it as a separate dominion by tradition of sovereignty. He would, in a sense, be voiding his own current title.
 
Originally posted by Jaron
so in reality at least, defeated and annexed lands didnt lose their crowns or such but merely had them transferred?
Click to expand...

or unclaimed, a crown could be siting around with no one picking it up. If a land that once had a King was conquered by another who did not claim kingship of the new realm, it would only be because he gave it to some one else. Or, if there was precedent for a united realm, to wit claiming the crown would be redundant.

Was there never annexations of areas that led to a crown being dissolved? Or did the conquerer always take the title for themself?
Click to expand...

Why dissolve it if you can claim it? A very good example of a dual Kingship was Henry V of England's son who was Henry VI of England and Henry II of France.

the only case I can think of takes place way after CK is over, and almost at the end of EU :p

that being the partition of poland. I don't recall the Russians, Prussians or Austrians taking the title King of Poland. But that's in the age of centralized nation states and I believe monarchies and crowns had different meanings and purposes. Feudalism was long gone.

I don't think its an applicable example but its the only one I could think of :p [/B]
Click to expand...

Exactly, the religious nature of a crown had disappeared by then. No one respected the title as a political reality in and of itself. It was now the Age of the Nation State. You were a King only if your people wanted you to be (and your people could only want that if they themselves had a country of their own, a Nation)
 
Originally posted by Sonny
But are you going to be able to play a subordinate dynasty? Everyone talks about breaking away from your overlord, but my impression was that you are going to be the overlord.:)
Click to expand...

IIRC, Sergei said that they will test out the possibility of playing some of the larger vassals during beta testing to see if it is a viable idea.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back