Patron of the Arts

[Geodynamis]

With the revamped character focus, can rulers become patrons of the arts? In CK2, you could promote business or be a religious scholar, but not patronize the arts. That feels weird, as I highly doubt no one in Europe, the Middle East, or India promoted cultural works in this time period.

 

[Krajzen]

Lack of patronage of arts, culture and science was one of biggest holes in the medieval world of ck2. Next to nonexistent trade, peasantry, city folk, monasteries and naval battles

 

[Torngasuk]

Artistic and cultural patronage in all its forms is another excellent opportunity for improvement and innovation in Crusader Kings III, I think. Troubadours, illuminated manuscripts, hospitals, universities, monasteries, historians, etc. Perhaps instead of personally writing the history of your dynasty, you commission a cleric to author in your behalf?

 

[Ezumiyr]

I think it could also bring some medieval flavour to the game, a bit like how in Civ6 your great people will produce historical masterpieces.
It would be a lot of work for sure, and some generic stuff would need to be added as well, but I would enjoy reading small excerpts from medieval literature or music.

 

[Pied-Noir]

Artistic and cultural patronage in all its forms is another excellent opportunity for improvement and innovation in Crusader Kings III, I think. Troubadours, illuminated manuscripts, hospitals, universities, monasteries, historians, etc. Perhaps instead of personally writing the history of your dynasty, you commission a cleric to author in your behalf?

I hope we see lots of culture-specific events in CK III, and Troubadors for Occitan culture would be great!

 

[Secuter]

Artistic and cultural patronage in all its forms is another excellent opportunity for improvement and innovation in Crusader Kings III, I think. Troubadours, illuminated manuscripts, hospitals, universities, monasteries, historians, etc. Perhaps instead of personally writing the history of your dynasty, you commission a cleric to author in your behalf?

The Normans did that. It was written by Dudo of St.Quentin. There was a huge focus on making your dynasty look good and to have a lasting legacy explaining where they came from. It's an interesting read.

 

[Federalist girl]

Culture was a big factor missing in CK2. I agree: I would love to see it represented somehow in CK3, beyond merely “cultural tech.”

 

[Andrelvis]

Culture was a big factor missing in CK2. I agree: I would love to see it represented somehow in CK3, beyond merely “cultural tech.”

At least in CK1 cultural tech levels had names

 

[Fierabras]

The Normans did that. It was written by Dudo of St.Quentin. There was a huge focus on making your dynasty look good and to have a lasting legacy explaining where they came from. It's an interesting read.

He's also blatantly lying, his account of the Treaty of Saint-Clair-sur-Epte in 911 being in many ways an obvious fabrication that serves to justify the de facto independence of the Duke of Normandy and their claims on Brittanny. It's pretty much what cultural patronage in CK3 should do: legitimizing your rule and spreading your influence!

 

[Secuter]

He's also blatantly lying, his account of the Treaty of Saint-Clair-sur-Epte in 911 being in many ways an obvious fabrication that serves to justify the de facto independence of the Duke of Normandy and their claims on Brittanny. It's pretty much what cultural patronage in CK3 should do: legitimizing your rule and spreading your influence!

He's not completely untrustworthy, though he has had a lot of criticism from historians. Yeah, he gets some things wrong, but Dudo wasn't even born in 911 and source material even for contemporaries are scarce. It is clear that you must use source criticism because he has obvious reasons for glorifying his Norman patrons. That said, he is the only source that describes the Norman society that closely. You are basically forced to use him if you want to write a paper on Norman history. At least he gets a lot closer to important events than the annals of Flodoard (another monk).

 

[Fierabras]

He's not completely untrustworthy, though he has had a lot of criticism from historians. Yeah, he gets some things wrong, but Dudo wasn't even born in 911 and source material even for contemporaries are scarce. It is clear that you must use source criticism because he has obvious reasons for glorifying his Norman patrons. That said, he is the only source that describes the Norman society that closely. You are basically forced to use him if you want to write a paper on Norman history. At least he gets a lot closer to important events than the annals of Flodoard (another monk).

Oh, I agree, I remember using Dudo extensively back in university, and you can't really get around him when researching the origins of Normandy - we know he's not exactly telling the truth (and quite deliberately so, like when he argues that Rollon was given both Normandy and Brittanny "in alodo et fundo") , but he is still the best source we've got.

/offtopic