Very good to see massive improvements to the Karelia area! Though not sure what this tiny wasteland is meant to be:
Also not sure why there's pearl production in Karelia? Is there a source/reason for this? I don't recall ever reading about pearl production there. Salt was the primary trade good in White Karelia.
SOURCE IN SWEDISH: https://www.karjalansivistysseura.fi/sv/sv-historia/vitahavskusten/
New name for finnic paganism is also fine.
Sami should not be a giant SoP as I've mentioned in the Scandinavia thread. Especially with Johan mentioning recently that SoPs have social stratification with nobles/clergy/peasants. Sami were generally bands of nomadic hunter-gatherers with little political centralization or social stratification. Reindeer herding wasn't a thing yet. Sami should just be tribesmen without a SoP.
If you're going to have a Sami SoP regardless of history, then at least split it into smaller ones based on Sami dialects.
Still some major problems with finno-ugric cultures, as some important feedback doesn't seem to have been implemented.
1. Why are there still Vepsians here? Veps inhabited the area south of Ladoga and Aunus. Map from the 9th century:
2. Why have you not implemented the feedback from these excellent posts:
It's pretty much how it should roughly look (except for Bjarmians). Important to note that his map marked majorities and minorities correctly. In the 1300s, finnic cultures are largely not yet assimilated into Russian especially in Volga and North Russia.
You can say "oh most of this will be in the Golden Horde feedback" and that's fine, but please fix the finnic cultures in Novgorod/Muscovy areas while you're at it.
3. Why are there Bjarmians on White Karelian coast??? I don't think anyone suggested that. Maybe you misunderstood a feedback post or something?
Bjarmians are believed to have lived on the Dvina river, in modern-day Archangelsk region.
I've circled the area where modern historians believe Bjarmaland was for your convenience. Sadly, one of the traditional sources for history of Bjarmia, "Bjarmien vallan kukoistus ja tuho", is only available in finnish from what I can tell. Do note that by the 1300s, Bjarmian culture was pretty much dying, so they should mostly be a minority if they do exist.
So who should inhabit the coast of White Karelia then? Well, um, Karelians, obviously. Though they probably hadn't settled the northern parts of the coast in the 1300s yet. Some Pomor lived there too, of course.
SOURCE IN SWEDISH: https://www.karjalansivistysseura.fi/sv/sv-historia/vitahavskusten/
In conclusion, this isn't just finnic nationalist circlejerk. The history of the finno-ugric peoples of Russia is closely intertwined with the history of the, well, Russian people. Even Russian historians acknowledge this. If you want an accurate representation of the history of Russia, you need to accurately represent the role of the various finno-ugric people who lived there, especially this far away in history. Sorry if I sound a bit harsh, but I'm just sad the excellent feedback I saw wasn't implemented at all.
Also not sure why there's pearl production in Karelia? Is there a source/reason for this? I don't recall ever reading about pearl production there. Salt was the primary trade good in White Karelia.
SOURCE IN SWEDISH: https://www.karjalansivistysseura.fi/sv/sv-historia/vitahavskusten/
New name for finnic paganism is also fine.
Sami should not be a giant SoP as I've mentioned in the Scandinavia thread. Especially with Johan mentioning recently that SoPs have social stratification with nobles/clergy/peasants. Sami were generally bands of nomadic hunter-gatherers with little political centralization or social stratification. Reindeer herding wasn't a thing yet. Sami should just be tribesmen without a SoP.
If you're going to have a Sami SoP regardless of history, then at least split it into smaller ones based on Sami dialects.
Still some major problems with finno-ugric cultures, as some important feedback doesn't seem to have been implemented.
1. Why are there still Vepsians here? Veps inhabited the area south of Ladoga and Aunus. Map from the 9th century:
2. Why have you not implemented the feedback from these excellent posts:
It's pretty much how it should roughly look (except for Bjarmians). Important to note that his map marked majorities and minorities correctly. In the 1300s, finnic cultures are largely not yet assimilated into Russian especially in Volga and North Russia.
You can say "oh most of this will be in the Golden Horde feedback" and that's fine, but please fix the finnic cultures in Novgorod/Muscovy areas while you're at it.
3. Why are there Bjarmians on White Karelian coast??? I don't think anyone suggested that. Maybe you misunderstood a feedback post or something?
Bjarmians are believed to have lived on the Dvina river, in modern-day Archangelsk region.
I've circled the area where modern historians believe Bjarmaland was for your convenience. Sadly, one of the traditional sources for history of Bjarmia, "Bjarmien vallan kukoistus ja tuho", is only available in finnish from what I can tell. Do note that by the 1300s, Bjarmian culture was pretty much dying, so they should mostly be a minority if they do exist.
So who should inhabit the coast of White Karelia then? Well, um, Karelians, obviously. Though they probably hadn't settled the northern parts of the coast in the 1300s yet. Some Pomor lived there too, of course.
SOURCE IN SWEDISH: https://www.karjalansivistysseura.fi/sv/sv-historia/vitahavskusten/
In conclusion, this isn't just finnic nationalist circlejerk. The history of the finno-ugric peoples of Russia is closely intertwined with the history of the, well, Russian people. Even Russian historians acknowledge this. If you want an accurate representation of the history of Russia, you need to accurately represent the role of the various finno-ugric people who lived there, especially this far away in history. Sorry if I sound a bit harsh, but I'm just sad the excellent feedback I saw wasn't implemented at all.
Attachments
Last edited:
- 11
- 8
- 4
- 4
.png){kind=avatar}
