• 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.
Only individual, but post them just in case. I am curious now.
The question was more of a theoretical kind, I haven't projected my settlement data on your map, so I'm not certain which settlements could fall into this case. Also, my question was with Hungary in mind, so this thread might not be the correct one to post to. I'll post a little something about this in the Carpathia-Balkans feedback thread.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Ok so I did some research for the territory of Poland (in game areas: lesser Poland, central Poland, greater Poland and Mazovia).

I could not find any evidence of urban centres that would meet the games definition except the two that already exist (namely Krakow & Poznan)
Most reliable numbers I found in research are from the 16th century on and not directly useful here.

As a consolation I found this table below (markings by me) out of this paper:

It depicts a comparison of studies done on the population of Poland around the start date.
The two studies on the left are considered outdated.
The Study by Tadeusz Ładogórski (the furthest to the right) counts as the most credible (or so I've read). But you can use one by Vielrose if those numbers suit you better.
Note: the total is always without the numbers for Silesia and Pomerania.

The truth is nobody really knows the true population numbers and those are the best estimates I've read.
Hopefully that is helpful in distributing the population within Poland.
 

Attachments

  • 1747403934992.png
    1747403934992.png
    139 KB · Views: 0
Last edited:
  • 1Like
Reactions:
I'm not sure if white populations didn't also have negative growth in plantation islands too...
Dunno why mestizos wouldn't count as functionally white here.

Anyway, but the thing with the rest of the islands is they transitioned with slavery relatively quickly and never had long term European migration, Barbados for example struggled early on and then when slavery accelerated many people just moved to the 13 colonies.
 
Dunno why mestizos wouldn't count as functionally white here.

Anyway, but the thing with the rest of the islands is they transitioned with slavery relatively quickly and never had long term European migration, Barbados for example struggled early on and then when slavery accelerated many people just moved to the 13 colonies.
Guys this is getting off-topic.
 
  • 2
Reactions:
I don't know what sources you guys used for the culture map regarding polatskian, polesian, and auskstatian but it is incredibly messed up, Braslau was made in 1065 on the border with lithuanian tribes in the principality of Polotsk, the name of the city is of slavic origin in all but one theory some of the theories for it's name are that: 1: the most widely accepted theory is that it derives from it's first ruler, brachislav, which is a clearly slavic name. There are other theories that it is accociated with other slavic words such as bras (to gather or to take). There is one theory that states that it is tied to the baltic word "brasla" which translates to the shallow of the river. Even if this one theory is true this city was still irrefutably started in polotsk and and would certainly have not somehow became an Aukštaitijan majority in only 30 years after polotsk became a vassal in 1307. especially as there was only minor migration of lithuanians to ruthenian terrirories and vice versa.


Sources: https://www.jewishgen.org/yizkor/braslaw/bra013.html
https://www.belarus.by/en/travel/to...-beach-festivals_i_0000131136.html?utm_source

Grodno is another city which is wrongly stated to have an Aukštaitijan majority. The city of Grodno was founded in the year 1127 under the kievan rus made on its western border as a trading town. the etymology of the city is seen to be derived from mostly slavic roots. The main theory is that is comes from the slavic word gorodit (meaning to enclose or to fence) the old slavic word "gradŭ" meaning fortress, castle, or town. there is also a standing orthodox church, the Old Grodno Castle, and various other ruthenian archetecture in the area which are one of the last standing examples of archetecture of black ruthenians. It is important to note however that populations in this time often mixed and did not have defnined cultural boundaries and there were a lot of baltic Yotvingians living in the surrounding areas as well so it would be wise to include those as well, however there is no evidence that there was a significant Aukštaitijan population.

Sources: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kalozha_Church
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Grodno_Castle
https://www.jewishgen.org/belarus/lists/info_history_of_grodno.htm
https://zetgrodno.com/iz-istorii-goroda-grodno

We have established that Both Bralau and Grodno are almost certainly slavic majority cities. Lida is a little bit more grey on this issue. The general consensus is that Lida derives from the lithuanian word lydimas, meaning slash and burn yet this is also close to the slavic term lyada as well as theories of the cities name coming from gothic roots of Lindo, Liht. The city is generally said to have been established in 1323 when its castle was constructed however there is also mention in chronicles that it was built in 1180 under the Dainovsky Principality which was a suboordinate of the Kyivan Rus. Several other towns located inbetween also have mixed origins, Ashmaynty is widely believed to be lithuanian etymologically (deriving its name from the Ašmena river) while the very nearby town of pastavy is generally beleived to be from the slavic word of "postava" translating to figure or character. I should mention that these cities were created after the game peiod ashmyany in 1350 and pastavy 1409 however it still signifies the presence of slavs in the same region.

Sources:
R. Schmittlein. Toponymes finnois et germaniques en Lituanie // Onomastica. Revue Internationale de Toponymie et d'Anthroponymie. — Paris, 1948. — P. 104.


In conclusion I think that the Polesian cultural group should be extended further north ending at grodno, the polastkian cultural group should be in ownership of braslav and likely pastavy, the central area between those two cities would still likely be majority Aukštaitijan (yet not without a significant slavic population) and I think that there should most likely be more lines depicting mixed populations as like it or not the duchy of lithuania was a mixed society and there was no strict border between slavs and balts. I will attach the file of how I think an accurate map would look and some other related maps to the cultural makeup
I really don't know why both Grodno and Braslaw are majority aukstatian when both towns were established by the kyivan rus, have ruthenian etymology. Braslaw was established by polotsk on the border with the aukstatians, while grodno was established on the border with the Yotvingians. I quoted my previous post on this, if anyone has any historical sources or facts to back up the claim to why both areas should be majority aukstatian with no minority polotskian or Polesian presence please feel free to do so

And please don't just downvote this post because of the current geopolitical situation in eastern europe, it is important to be historically accurate
 
  • 3
  • 2
Reactions:
We already said that we used McEvedy in one Tinto Talks. It is true that this book is rather outdated but it is still rather used as source for many modern ones and more importantly, it covers the whole world, which helps with keeping consistency.

As someone that has been reading about demographics in general, and medieval demographics in particular (several years before I joined Tinto, even), I can tell you that everyone (has to) work with estimations so expecting a "correct" answer is not attainable. Even the "use more modern data" claim is not even that useful because in many cases the "novelty" is using a different method to calculate something, not that it is necessarily more accurate.

What I am trying to say, and specially for those that lose their nerves when discussing about estimations is that this is a highly debatable matter and very much up to interpretation.

The America's topic is indeed very polarized politically speaking and personally it is nothing I am going to get into. Internally we have decided an approach that people are, obviously, free to criticize, but we expect and hope that it is respected.

As people are also trying to propose more towns and cities, let me clarify (I think that it was already said, but whatever), that we are looking for towns (5.000 people in 1337) and cities (25.000 people in 1337). If data is provided we can consider adding them. Most collections of data that we have managed to get (Chandler, Bairoch, de Vivre, Malamina, etc) have already been used. The lack of data is specially dramatic outside of Western Europe and specially Europe in general.

First of all, thank you for the immense work that has gone into EU5. The level of detail and the effort to maintain historical consistency across the world is impressive, especially given the challenges of working with medieval data. I also appreciate your transparency in using sources like McEvedy, and your clear communication that population estimates are inherently interpretive and imprecise.

With that understanding in mind, I would like to respectfully suggest a reconsideration of how towns are represented in the Ruthenian region—particularly Galicia–Volhynia and the Kyiv area—in the 1337 start. Currently, these areas feature very few towns (settlements with over 5,000 inhabitants), and many historically significant urban centers are either omitted or undervalued. While I’m not suggesting a dramatic increase in town count, a few additional towns would better reflect the historical urban network and improve regional balance.

EDIT: For instance, important cities like Halych, Volodymyr-Volynskyi, Lutsk, and Kremenets played major political, religious, and economic roles during this period. While Volodymyr was the primary capital around 1337—the start date of the game—Halych remained a highly significant urban and ecclesiastical center. Earlier, it had served as the power base of Prince Roman Mstyslavych and later became the religious seat of the Metropolis of Halych, established with the support of King Yurii I. Although it was not the formal capital at that time, its status as a religious center, along with its long-standing urban development and strategic importance, make its absence from the town list feel like a notable oversight.

To support this point, I refer to a scholarly article:
P. V. Hlibchuk, "Мережа міських поселень України в період середньовіччя (X – кінець XVII ст.)", published in Visnyk Heodezii ta Kartohrafii, 2015. The study includes a detailed map and a breakdown of settlement patterns across medieval Ukraine. According to the article, over 240 urban settlements existed during the Kyivan Rus period, of which roughly 90 were large towns. The Galychyna-Volhynia region maintained and developed many of these even after the Mongol invasions.

What makes this study particularly helpful is that it synthesizes data from multiple well-established academic and cartographic sources, including:

  • The National Atlas of Ukraine (edited by L. H. Rudenko) – a modern state-published atlas including historical demographic data and settlement patterns.
  • Works by historians such as O.V. Rusina and A.V. Tolstoukhov, which compile extensive historical chronicles and archaeological evidence of urban life in the region.
  • Historical cartographic sources such as those by Guillaume Le Vasseur de Beauplan, Mercator, and Ortelius, who mapped the region in the 16th and 17th centuries—indicating numerous towns and fortifications already in place by the 14th century.
  • Medieval chronicles and church records (e.g., Kormchiye Knigi, referring to local governance and law codes) that help identify which settlements had administrative and judicial infrastructure associated with towns.
According to the article, towns like Lviv had about 3,000 residents in the 14th century and grew to 10,000 by the early 15th century. Kremenets and Kamianets-Podilskyi likely reached 5,000 inhabitants by the 16th century. Given these trends, it's reasonable to infer that cities like Halych or Volodymyr-Volynskyi may have already been approaching or at the 5,000 mark in 1337, especially when accounting for their regional significance.

I understand that you are trying to maintain consistency across all world regions, and that population estimates are inherently debatable. But I hope this additional source—and the multi-source nature of the study—can provide enough grounded evidence to consider adding just a few more towns to this historically rich and strategically important region.

Thank you again for your dedication and for being open to respectful feedback.

Sources
Глібчук П. В.
Мережа міських поселень України в період середньовіччя (X – кінець XVII ст.
1747412984381.png



1747411449076.png

1747412942123.png
 
Last edited:
  • 5
  • 3Like
Reactions:
For instance, important cities like Halych, Volodymyr-Volynskyi, Lutsk, and even Kremenets played major political, religious, and economic roles during this period. Halych, in particular, was the capital of the Galicia–Volhynia principality and a center of trade and administration, yet it is not even marked as a town in-game, while Lviv is—despite Halych being more prominent earlier on.
Halych wasn't the capital of Galicia-Volhynia. In different periods, it was Volodymyr, Kholm, and Lviv, and at the time of the game's start, the capital was in Volodymyr. Halych was the center of Metropolis of Halych created with the assistance of Yurii I.
 
  • 3Like
  • 1
Reactions:
I understand that you are trying to maintain consistency across all world regions, and that population estimates are inherently debatable. But I hope this additional source—and the multi-source nature of the study—can provide enough grounded evidence to consider adding just a few more towns to this historically rich and strategically important region.
Thats the thing, If consistency is not important, I have a wish list too:

Gniezno, coronation city and seat of the Polish Bishopric
Piotrków Trybunalski, meeting place of the Sejm and later crown tribunal (edited in)
Kalisz, tradehub on the amber road and kinda midway between Poznan and Krakow
Nowy Sacz, bordertown to Hungary and trade hub
Lublin, had like 1000 citizens at the time but also a important trade hub

All of them got bigger by/in the 15th century.

But I’m also fine if that’s part of the challenge of playing in the east and creating those towns during gameplay.
 
Last edited:
  • 3Like
  • 2
Reactions:
Halych wasn't the capital of Galicia-Volhynia. In different periods, it was Volodymyr, Kholm, and Lviv, and at the time of the game's start, the capital was in Volodymyr. Halych was the center of Metropolis of Halych created with the assistance of Yurii I.
Yes i did a small mistake in my writing i corrected it thank you for the correction
 
  • 2Like
Reactions:
Thats the thing, If consistency is not important, I have a wish list too:

Gniezno, coronation city and seat of the Polish Bishopric
Kalisz, tradehub on the amber road and kinda midway between Poznan and Krakow
Nowy Sacz, bordertown to Hungary and trade hub
Lublin, had like 1000 citizens at the time but also a important trade hub

All of them got bigger by/in the 15th century.

But I’m also fine if that’s part of the challenge of playing in the east and creating those towns during gameplay.

I really appreciate your perspective, and I absolutely agree—those places you mentioned like Gniezno, Kalisz, Nowy Sącz, and Lublin all have fascinating historical significance and would definitely add more depth to the region.


Personally, I’d welcome more flavor and detail across all of Eastern Europe. Right now, compared to Western Europe, it does feel a bit barren—not necessarily in a gameplay sense, but in terms of reflecting the historical and cultural richness of the area. I’ve actually been to both Nowy Sącz and Lublin, and they’re amazing places with deep history and unique character. You can really feel how important they must have been in the past.


I don’t have a long wish list either, and I totally understand the need for balance. I’m not suggesting to flood the map with towns, but I do think just a few more key places—especially those that had strong regional importance—would really help the region shine and make playing in the east more engaging from the start.


Thanks for the thoughtful discussion!
 
  • 2Like
Reactions:
The player would have many opportunities to upgrade their locations to towns and cities. And, as one YouTube content creator mentioned, the AI actively builds new towns and cities, so it’s not as big an issue as it may seem. I just don't think any settlement in Ruthenia met the required population threshold (5,000 for a town and 25,000 for a city), except perhaps Lviv. It seems the developers consider this criterion to be universal.


As for Lviv, some sources claim that its population was around 5,500–6,000 at the beginning of the 15th century. However, a significant portion of the city's population were Germans, who began settling there actively during the 14th and the beginning of 15th centuries (mostly after the start date). Therefore, it’s unclear whether the city had more than 5,000 people in 1337. Still, it would be worth at least to consider upgrading Lviv to a town, as other towns in the region had smaller populations in 1337.

1747418228852.png


Also some more sources on this topic:
Lozinsky, R. (2005). Етнічний склад населення Львова [Ethnic composition of Lviv's population]
Kozitsky A., Pidkova I. (2007). Енциклопедія Львова [Lviv Encyclopedia] (in Ukrainian). Vol. 1.
 
Last edited:
  • 3Like
  • 3
Reactions:
Personally, I’d welcome more flavor and detail across all of Eastern Europe. Right now, compared to Western Europe, it does feel a bit barren—not necessarily in a gameplay sense, but in terms of reflecting the historical and cultural richness of the area. I’ve actually been to both Nowy Sącz and Lublin, and they’re amazing places with deep history and unique character. You can really feel how important they must have been in the past.
Unfortunately, Eastern Europe was barren in comparison to a big part of Western Europe. I do empathize with the feeling of not having towns represented in the map, but we consider consistency to be important and we try our best to achieve it so every region plays under the same rules.

That being said, I appreciate your kind approach and the maps you provided (if I can overstep a bit, I would love if they were a bit higher resolution) and I have saved them for my personal collection. It will be useful for any future touch we make in the region.
 
  • 11Like
  • 3
  • 1Love
Reactions:
We already said that we used McEvedy in one Tinto Talks. It is true that this book is rather outdated but it is still rather used as source for many modern ones and more importantly, it covers the whole world, which helps with keeping consistency.

As someone that has been reading about demographics in general, and medieval demographics in particular (several years before I joined Tinto, even), I can tell you that everyone (has to) work with estimations so expecting a "correct" answer is not attainable. Even the "use more modern data" claim is not even that useful because in many cases the "novelty" is using a different method to calculate something, not that it is necessarily more accurate.

What I am trying to say, and specially for those that lose their nerves when discussing about estimations is that this is a highly debatable matter and very much up to interpretation.

The America's topic is indeed very polarized politically speaking and personally it is nothing I am going to get into. Internally we have decided an approach that people are, obviously, free to criticize, but we expect and hope that it is respected.

As people are also trying to propose more towns and cities, let me clarify (I think that it was already said, but whatever), that we are looking for towns (5.000 people in 1337) and cities (25.000 people in 1337). If data is provided we can consider adding them. Most collections of data that we have managed to get (Chandler, Bairoch, de Vivre, Malamina, etc) have already been used. The lack of data is specially dramatic outside of Western Europe and specially Europe in general.
Thank you for replying! This is insightful.

Nevertheless, this response is confusing to me, and probably not only to me.

You have included, as an example, several locations in Ireland, Scotland and Scandinavia as towns, but from any research I was able to do, either there is far too insufficient data or estimates are far below the 5k limit. Do you have any good evidence, for example, that Iverness was larger than, say, Sandomierz, Lublin, Lviv, Kalisz?


You include Wrocław and Poznań as towns, but you don't include Lviv or Lublin, despite those most likely being fairly comparable settlements at the time.

There isn't much reliable data that can tell us for certain what the populations of these places were, but several locations in Poland and Ruthenia would approach this 5k threshold.

I would be fascinated if you could share any sources you've used for this!
 
  • 3
Reactions:
Duchy of Inowrocław and Dobrzyn were incorporated to Poland in 1327 and the only duchy in 1337 remained was duchy of Gniewkowo. You mistook the historical periods because the 1364/1363 duchies of Inowrocław/Dobrzyn were given to hungarian advisor Władysław Opolczyk by hungarian King Louis I.
Duchy of Inowrocław did exist at the start of the game. You seem to think the moment it was acquired by Władysław I the Short in 1327 (in exchange for Duchy of Sieradz) it ceased to exist, but that's not true. At the start of the game it de jure constituted a separate entity ruled by the King of Poland (Władysław I the Short, then his son Casimir III the Great). It was incorporated and turned into voivodeship in 1364.
The game depicts it in 1337 as a dominium of Poland ruled by Casimir III, which is correct.

Yes, Duchy of Gniewkowo did exist as a separate entity in 1337 too, but since both of them lay within the borders of the same location, you can only represent one. Developers picked Duchy of Inowrocław. I do not have any preference here, as both of them were rather short-lived, had similar status (one was a dominium, the other one a vassal of Kingdom of Poland) and faced the same fate (both were incorporated in 1360's), but if you would rather see Gniewko in and Inowrocław out, feel free to put forth reasons why you think it should be so.
 
  • 3
Reactions:
Thank you for replying! This is insightful.

Nevertheless, this response is confusing to me, and probably not only to me.

You have included, as an example, several locations in Ireland, Scotland and Scandinavia as towns, but from any research I was able to do, either there is far too insufficient data or estimates are far below the 5k limit. Do you have any good evidence, for example, that Iverness was larger than, say, Sandomierz, Lublin, Lviv, Kalisz?
I have not added those and I prefer to not touch others work without discussing things first.
You include Wrocław and Poznań as towns, but you don't include Lviv or Lublin, despite those most likely being fairly comparable settlements at the time.

There isn't much reliable data that can tell us for certain what the populations of these places were, but several locations in Poland and Ruthenia would approach this 5k threshold.

I would be fascinated if you could share any sources you've used for this!
I already mentioned the sources in the post you quoted. ;)

Wroclaw and Poznan do appear in several of those sources but not the other cities, which is why I did not include them. The point is that "mosty likely" is guessing and while every estimate is also a guess, it is an educated guess that several people with better understanding on demographics than me have done.
 
  • 2Like
  • 2
Reactions:
when was this screenshot taken, i dont think an Eufemia Rurikid ruled in 1337
edit: ok its from zlewikk's vid, probably after Yuri's death, but why dont Liubartas and the Gediminids rule it?
I used it from the previous post, did not notice it in the video :)
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
I have not added those and I prefer to not touch others work without discussing things first.

I already mentioned the sources in the post you quoted. ;)

Wroclaw and Poznan do appear in several of those sources but not the other cities, which is why I did not include them. The point is that "mosty likely" is guessing and while every estimate is also a guess, it is an educated guess that several people with better understanding on demographics than me have done.
Okay, I'll try to review those ASAP and find other sources, if possible.

I understand that you don't want to comment on other's work, but you yourself are talking about the need for consistency across regions, and I'm arguing that this doesn't seem to be the case, given that you seem to be including smaller settlements as towns in Scotland, Ireland and Scandinavia. I disagree that eastern Europe was barren, though it obviously didn't see the development that Roman Europe did.

I think the omission of Gniezno, the archbishopric and former capital of Poland, Lviv and Lublin, major trading towns at this time, and Kulm, the city that literally was an originator of one of the three types of urban settlement charters in the region, is a mistake.

While population is difficult to establish, what we know more about is the infrastructure that existed, and we know of important urban settlements with churches, Magdeburg rights and therefore market squares, as well as city walls (in 1337) within this region that aren't represented at all. I do feel like existing urban structure might be a stronger indicator of what should be considered a city or town than dubious population estimates.

I am really appreciative of your attention and your replies; I'll try to spend some time doing proper research (and maybe translating some sources) to provide better context for why I think certain locations should be included.
 
  • 2Like
  • 2
  • 2
Reactions:
Let me post the map from my historical atlas showing settlements with over 2'000, 5'000 and 10'000 inhabitants during the reign of Casimir III.
If 5'000 is a hard-requirement to consider settlement a town in game, then the current depiction of the region seems rather correct.
Looking at the "urbanization" maps of other regions (Norway, Sweden, Scotland, Ireland) I do have my doubts, however, if the same consistent approach was followed everywhere.

IMG_20250516_215559398.jpg
 
  • 11Like
Reactions: