• 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.
Ottoman influence was probably felt low in the northern Albania such that they didnt find conversion attractive as conversion usually done for avoiding cizya etc, and low control of Ottomans wouldnt open economic opportunities,

and maybe due to not being close to Turks Ottomans brought to Balkans who they lived in relatively flat terrain, and thus wouldnt interact with the Albanians in the North.

As Ottomans didnt force conversion much, conversions usually occurred due to exposure over a long period of time, or for economic advantages.

Of course legacy of Skanderbeg would be kept in the memories of the Northern Albanians (which was the center of resistance) I guess which would be part of their identity, and is probably another reason of their resilience,

Overall I feel like people in harsh terrain is more strict to their traditions, due to harsh lifestyle I guess, and they werent forced to convert much, so they continued Christianity, kinda similar to Georgians
Glad to see this discussion staying on track! Unlike some who resort to using new accounts or outside help just to manipulate reactions. I personally give likes or dislikes based on the content, without resorting to such tactics. That said, since we can report users for abuse, is there also a way to report moderators if needed? On a brighter note, its interesting to see more attention on the Balkans these days.
 
The truth is you litteraly bullied Croatia because you cant cope as your examples show that the only time Albania did not sleep in the game’s timeframe is under Skanderbeg, you gave 18 reasons but it only counts as one lol, which puts into no advantage over Croatia
Allow me to add some on the matter of "Albania sleeping after being part of the empire" i only made an explanation about Croatia. Regarding that claim particularly, that ‘Albania only mattered under Skanderbeg' wich is inaccurate.

Skanderbeg resistance was a defining moment but, Albanias role did not fade after his era. Even after a century of resistance and eventual conquest by a larger power, they remained highly active and influential in the Ottoman Empire.

For example:
1. Küçük Hasan Pasha was an Albanian Grand Admiral, Kapudan Pasha of the Ottoman fleet at its peak.
2. Mehmet Ali Pasha of Egypt-seized control of Egypt, destroyed the Mamluks in 1811, and waged war against the Ottoman Empire itself.
3. Ali Pasha of Janina was a powerful Albanian leader who defied the Sultan and ruled his territory like an independent state.
4. The Janissary Albanian Revolt directly challenged the Sultan military reforms and opposition to Western tactics.
5. Koca Sinan Pasha- A Grand Vizier of the Ottoman Empire five times. He played a key role in wars against the Habsburgs and Persians and led the conquest of Tunisia in 1574.
6. Iljaz Bey Mirahori- An Ottoman military commander and close ally of Sultan Bayezid II. He was instrumental in the conquest of Italy’s Otranto in 1480.
7. Evrenos Bey- An early Ottoman military leader of Albanian origin who led conquests in the Balkans and Anatolia.
8.Koca Davud Pasha - An Albanian Grand Vizier of the Ottoman Empire (1482–1497).
9. Hasan Pasha Toptani- An influential Ottoman-Albanian governor who helped consolidate Ottoman rule in Albania and Kosovo.
10. Ahmet Pasha Dukagjini- A high-ranking Ottoman official from the noble Dukagjini family.
11. Köprülü Mehmed Pasha- Founder of the powerful Köprülü dynasty, which ruled the empire through multiple Grand Viziers. He enacted major military and administrative reforms.
12.Köprülü Fazıl Ahmed Pasha - His son, who expanded Ottoman influence in Central Europe and launched successful campaigns against Austria and Venice.

Despite being integrated into the empire, Albanians were far from sleeping. Their leadership, military influence, and resistance to central authority show that they remained a force to be reckoned with throughout the period. History does not begin and end with a single leader.
 
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
Hello! I really enjoy looking at the development of youor game! I am very excited about it!
However, I would like to add my opinion on hungarian Locations and Provinces. :p
I was born and raised in Békés County (which means Peaceful County:D), which was also the name of the medieval county, as it is also shown on your maps. However, it is shown as a Location, not as a Province, while the nowadays city Szolnok is a Province... Also, instead of the current capital of the current county, my hometown, named Gyula would become the capital of the county, intsead of Békés. I would personally apprechiate if you would look into this issue, since it would mean a lot to me. c:
Also, almost all of the Counties of Hungary are incorrect, but I would assume having that many counties would mess with the balance of the mechanics in the game >.<
You can find my sources on wikipedia as:
  • Counites of Hungary (1000-1920)
  • Békés County
Best wishes,
Gergő
 
  • 1Love
  • 1Haha
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Nah i get were you coming from. But since Croatia doesnt have anything interesting in medieval year of 1300-1600, until the battle of Sisak 1600, ( Fought on June 22, 1593, this battle saw a combined Christian army from the Habsburg lands, including Croatian forces, decisively defeat the Ottoman army led by Telli Hasan Pasha. The victory halted Ottoman expansion into Croatia and is celebrated as a significant triumph in Croatian history.


Doesnt mean your southern friends are sleeping at this period of time. The Croatians defeated them once with Hungarians, and the Albanians did it
Every date you just wrote is over 100 years after the start of the game, and about one person. My thinking was they have flavours for countries that were at least somewhat sequential at the start of the game barring some really important countries like GB, Prussia and Russia. Honestly i think even Serbia will get nothing other than empire, and implosion of it. And that only because it is at the start of the game and it is tied to the fan favourite ERE.
 
  • 3Like
Reactions:
Hello! I really enjoy looking at the development of youor game! I am very excited about it!
However, I would like to add my opinion on hungarian Locations and Provinces. :p
I was born and raised in Békés County (which means Peaceful County:D), which was also the name of the medieval county, as it is also shown on your maps. However, it is shown as a Location, not as a Province, while the nowadays city Szolnok is a Province... Also, instead of the current capital of the current county, my hometown, named Gyula would become the capital of the county, intsead of Békés. I would personally apprechiate if you would look into this issue, since it would mean a lot to me. c:
Also, almost all of the Counties of Hungary are incorrect, but I would assume having that many counties would mess with the balance of the mechanics in the game >.<
You can find my sources on wikipedia as:
  • Counites of Hungary (1000-1920)
  • Békés County
Best wishes,
Gergő
With all due respect, both Szolnok and Békés used to be both the names of cities and counties at the same time (although technically the name of Szolnok county was Külső-Szolnok). Gyula became the most prominent town in Békés county after its namesake town Békés diminished in importance, in 1337, Békés was the most important settlement in Békés county.

I do also wish that the province setup had every county that existed in 1337 as a province, however I understand that this is not possible due to balance reasons.
 
  • 2Like
Reactions:
Every date you just wrote is over 100 years after the start of the game, and about one person. My thinking was they have flavours for countries that were at least somewhat sequential at the start of the game barring some really important countries like GB, Prussia and Russia. Honestly i think even Serbia will get nothing other than empire, and implosion of it. And that only because it is at the start of the game and it is tied to the fan favourite ERE.

The span from 1336 to 1444 might seem narrow within the Europa universalis V, vast timeline, every date I mentioned isnt arbitrary its an initialization point that triggers lots of historical events crucial for Europe:

For example, the period from the aftermath of the Battle of Kosovo to the rise of Skanderbeg isnt solely about one heroic figure. Skanderbegs success was built on the contributions of renowned commanders like Moisi Golemi and Gjergj Arianiti, among others. Also his achievements were further bolstered by alliances with powers from Venetia, Napoli, Hungary, Austria , Burgundy and Aragon. Importantly, the Papal State provided military, financially, and diplomatic support, wich can be reflected in the game, the last crusade failed, crusade of Nicopolis 1396 Sultan Bayezid defeated in battle a coalition of France, Hungarian, and many other Europian states. Skanderbeg later on pushed for another crusade against the Ottomans, and there were serious efforts to organize one. It was planned by Pope Pius II in 1464, who sought to unite European Christian forces under Skanderbegs leadership. However, Pope Pius died in 1464 before the crusade could materialize, ending the effort. Despite this, Skanderbeg continued his resistance, securing key victories like the Battle of Ohrid 1464 and sucesfully defending Krujë.

Now i understand that for some, major powers like GB, Prussia, and Russia might dominate the historical aspects of the game. However, the early era defined by a series of events represents a transformative period in European history wich shaped the continents future. Skanderbeg resistance helped protect regions like Italy, Austria, and Hungary from immediate Ottoman invasions. Skanderbeg was one of the most effective resistance leaders of his time. And it was reflected amazingly in Europa Universalis IV.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Regarding Gjirokaster, Venetian sources mention Albanians in Epirus as early as 1210, and Byzantine records describe a major Albanian population into the region by the late 13th century. By the 1330s, several Albanian clans had begun asserting control over strategic locations, including Gjirokastër. This was a direct result of political instability in the Despotate of Epirus, which created a power vacuum that local Albanian noble families were quick to exploit.

The Zenebishti family was one of the prominent Albanian noble families that rose to power in this period based in, Gjirokastër. While the most well-documented figure, (Gjon Zenebishi), is recorded as ruling Gjirokastër his familys influence in the area predates him by at least several decades. A lack of Albanian population needs a change there at least on that i hope we can agree. @Qyubid

Sources : John V.A. Fine- The Late Medieval Balkans: A Critical Survey from the Late Twelfth Century to the Ottoman Conquest, and Donald M. Nicol (The Despotate of Epiros 1267–1479) confirm an Albanian population on those regions. This means that Gjirokastër was likely already under some form of Albanian governance or influence by 1330 even if Zenebishi himself is more prominently recorded later.
John V. A. Fine– Confirms Albanian noble control over parts of Epirus before 1370 and their rise during Byzantine-Serbian struggles.
Donald M. Nicol– Details how Albanian clans, including the Zenebishti, gradually expanded their power in Epirus amid the Despotate’s decline.
Karl Hopf – Mentions Albanian rule in various parts of Epirus, including references to the Zenevisi family.
Acta et Diplomata Res Albaniae Mediae Aetatis Illustrantia (Thallóczy, Jireček, Šufflay)Contains medieval charters referring to Albanian noble families, reinforcing their political presence.
Nicholas G. L. Hammond – On the shift of power in Epirus from Greeks to local Albanian lords.

These sources collectively support the fact that Albanians were already a dominant force in parts of Epirus, in the south region, well before the 1340. While John Zenebishti is the most famous ruler of the region in the late 14th century, it is but factual that his family and an Albanian population had been active there earlier.

@Pavía What should be considered if possible please: Adding Zenebishti as a Playable Clan or Increase Albanian Representation in those regions by population.
IMG_1249.jpeg




Given historical evidence of Albanian rule in Gjirokastër please either introduce the Zenebishti as a distinct clan tag or at the very least increase the Albanian population in Epirus to reflect historical realities.
 
  • 6Like
  • 2
Reactions:
So, couple of suggestions for southern Albania. Reference map and suggestions from The Despotate of Epiros:
1742060209024.png

Few things:
1742060484860.png

1742060547787.png

1742060560124.png

1742060580154.png

1742060642899.png

1742060658832.png

1742060676748.png

1742060689134.png

1742060741985.png


And from The Late Medieval Balkans:
1742061664552.png

1742061692999.png



So... this is a bit messy. It seems clear to me that Avlonas and Kleisoura shouldn't belong to Epirus. However, how do we represent the fact that the Byzantines only controlled the forts and walled towns but not the surrounding countryside? We know the Muzaka were rulers of the area around Berat and (assuming Wikipedia is right on this) Kleisoura as well. To me, there's two paths forward here:
  1. Give Berat, Kleisoura, Avlonas to the Byzantines with a high tribal Albanian population, low control, and something (whether foreign-owned building or something else) to represent Muzaka authority in Berat despite not owning the fortress of Berat itself
  2. Give Kleisoura to the Muzaka (and Avlonas to the Byzantines) and use foreign-owned buildings for the Byzantines in Berat and Kleisoura to represent their control over the forts in those areas. Bump up the Albanian population in Avlonas and give that location low control as well.
The first one has the appeal of avoiding weird disconnection in locations but is extremely awkward in its representation of who actually owns the land; to say the least, I am not happy with taking Berat away from the Muzaka and then just stacking on a building or modifier to say "hey they actually ruled everything around here". The second one has an awkward disjoint Byzantine territory of Avlonas (though it's coastal), but "foreign-owned fortress" is a lot more coherent a thing to represent to me than "foreign-owned countryside".

So, I'd say the second one.

Also the Muzaka should be at war with the Byzantines in 1337, with those foreign-owned fortresses in Kleisoura occupied.

Additionally I agree with @EneaBako here; there needs to be a lot more Albanians either in or flowing into Epirus in 1337. Keep in mind that by the collapse of the Serbian Empire, we're seeing an Albanian principality in Arta. The Black Death may lay waste to the population of the countryside and speed up a lot of the movement of Albanians outward through the rest of Epirus, but we're talking 20 years here. 20 years! That's not a lot of time!
 
Last edited:
  • 10Like
Reactions:
So... this is a bit messy. It seems clear to me that Avlonas and Kleisoura shouldn't belong to Epirus. However, how do we represent the fact that the Byzantines only controlled the forts and walled towns but not the surrounding countryside? We know the Muzaka were rulers of the area around Berat and (assuming Wikipedia is right on this) Kleisoura as well. To me, there's two paths forward here:
  1. Give Berat, Kleisoura, Avlonas to the Byzantines with a high tribal Albanian population, low control, and something (whether foreign-owned building or something else) to represent Muzaka authority in Berat despite not owning the fortress of Berat itself
  2. Give Kleisoura to the Muzaka (and Avlonas to the Byzantines) and use foreign-owned buildings for the Byzantines in Berat and Kleisoura to represent their control over the forts in those areas. Bump up the Albanian population in Avlonas and give that location low control as well.
Yes 100% my own posts covered this too, although I focused excxlusively on the pop/ethnic composition of the areas. But its very clear from the descriptions of several sources that there was barely if any control of the area:
"The southward movement of the tribes was on a very large scale. It was also rapid, because towns and cities were bypassed (Dyrrachium, for instance, beingcaptured only c. 1368). It had two main effects. It took possession of Epirus Nova, the area inland of the coastal strip from Dyrrachium to Valona; and it sentstreams of migrants into most parts of the Greek peninsula and some of the Aegean islands. To the settled peoples they were a terror. "Deus misit hanc pestem,"wrote the author of the Gesta Dei per Francos 2. 293.They came, like a plague of locusts, in huge numbers("in tan ta quantitate numerosa") and in 1325 they ravaged and destroyed everything in Thessaly outsidethe fortified centres ("omnia quae erant extra castra").When they wanted to leave Thessaly and go elsewhere, many others appeared with their wives andchildren ("multi cum uxoribus et filiis") and their combined forces proceeded to wreck other parts of Thessaly. John Cantacuzenus 1. 495 described their raidson the west side of the peninsula in 1335: "The Albanoi who inhabit the area or Balagrita [Berat] and Kanina[inland of Valonal, being adaptable to change and bynature revolutionary, ravaged and plundered ...and oppressed the towns there with their brigandageand open raids"
Additionally I agree with @EneaBako here; there needs to be a lot more Albanians either in or flowing into Epirus in 1337. Keep in mind that by the collapse of the Serbian Empire, we're seeing an Albanian principality in Arta. The Black Death may lay waste to the population of the countryside and speed up a lot of the movement of Albanians outward through the rest of Epirus, but we're talking 20 years here. 20 years! That's not a lot of time!
Yes this is very much a problem with the current set up. There is already a stream of migration going downward before the games start wich only intensifies dramatically into changing the makeup of entire regions in mainland Greece. The devs have added the Vlachs migrations already but despite the Vlachs being the first to mover southward it is known that they were far outnumbered by albanians:
"The penetration of the Greek mainland which we have described occurred during the hundred or moreyears after 1325. The opportunity arose through thedecline and disruption of the Byzantine Empire andthe wars which followed between the various smallprincipalities of Greeks, Serbs, Catalans, Venetiansand others. One of the pressures which set the Albanians and others in motion came from the expandingpower of the Serbs which reached its peak under therule of Stephen Dusan (1331-1355), who subjugatedEpirus and Acarnania. A contributory factor seems to have been overpopulation among the Albanians 24-always a prolific people-and underpopulation in mainland Greece as a result of internal collapse and foreign intervention. The strongest single group ofinvaders was that of the Vlachs which pressed down into Thessaly and opened the way there for the Albanians. But the most numerous by far were the Albanian-speakers, and their main line of invasion and penetration was down the western side of northern and central Greece 25 (see Maps 11-13)"

Several of the sources I used also mentioned a underpopoulation in mainland Greece with a potential overpopulation in Albania but the way the devs depict population sizes in the Balkans Albania would run out of people right at the game start if the migrations do actually happen in the game like they did in history. It wouldnt even be game breaking cause we know the devs have the tools to be able to encourage immigrating somewhere else so giving Albania the population it needs to be able to simulate the migration southward will not lead to Albania steamrolling everyone due to population since they will migrate away.
 
  • 3
  • 2Like
Reactions:
Yes 100% my own posts covered this too, although I focused excxlusively on the pop/ethnic composition of the areas. But its very clear from the descriptions of several sources that there was barely if any control of the area:
"The southward movement of the tribes was on a very large scale. It was also rapid, because towns and cities were bypassed (Dyrrachium, for instance, beingcaptured only c. 1368). It had two main effects. It took possession of Epirus Nova, the area inland of the coastal strip from Dyrrachium to Valona; and it sentstreams of migrants into most parts of the Greek peninsula and some of the Aegean islands. To the settled peoples they were a terror. "Deus misit hanc pestem,"wrote the author of the Gesta Dei per Francos 2. 293.They came, like a plague of locusts, in huge numbers("in tan ta quantitate numerosa") and in 1325 they ravaged and destroyed everything in Thessaly outsidethe fortified centres ("omnia quae erant extra castra").When they wanted to leave Thessaly and go elsewhere, many others appeared with their wives andchildren ("multi cum uxoribus et filiis") and their combined forces proceeded to wreck other parts of Thessaly. John Cantacuzenus 1. 495 described their raidson the west side of the peninsula in 1335: "The Albanoi who inhabit the area or Balagrita [Berat] and Kanina[inland of Valonal, being adaptable to change and bynature revolutionary, ravaged and plundered ...and oppressed the towns there with their brigandageand open raids"

Yes this is very much a problem with the current set up. There is already a stream of migration going downward before the games start wich only intensifies dramatically into changing the makeup of entire regions in mainland Greece. The devs have added the Vlachs migrations already but despite the Vlachs being the first to mover southward it is known that they were far outnumbered by albanians:
"The penetration of the Greek mainland which we have described occurred during the hundred or moreyears after 1325. The opportunity arose through thedecline and disruption of the Byzantine Empire andthe wars which followed between the various smallprincipalities of Greeks, Serbs, Catalans, Venetiansand others. One of the pressures which set the Albanians and others in motion came from the expandingpower of the Serbs which reached its peak under therule of Stephen Dusan (1331-1355), who subjugatedEpirus and Acarnania. A contributory factor seems to have been overpopulation among the Albanians 24-always a prolific people-and underpopulation in mainland Greece as a result of internal collapse and foreign intervention. The strongest single group ofinvaders was that of the Vlachs which pressed down into Thessaly and opened the way there for the Albanians. But the most numerous by far were the Albanian-speakers, and their main line of invasion and penetration was down the western side of northern and central Greece 25 (see Maps 11-13)"

Several of the sources I used also mentioned a underpopoulation in mainland Greece with a potential overpopulation in Albania but the way the devs depict population sizes in the Balkans Albania would run out of people right at the game start if the migrations do actually happen in the game like they did in history. It wouldnt even be game breaking cause we know the devs have the tools to be able to encourage immigrating somewhere else so giving Albania the population it needs to be able to simulate the migration southward will not lead to Albania steamrolling everyone due to population since they will migrate away.
I thought of this too, it seems the devs won’t simulate the albanian migration into mainland Greece at all. They have added the arvanite culture(which means it is likely assumed to have already happened a long time before the game’s timeline. Hopefully they add some flavor to the balkans at some point later.
With the current population numbers in Albania(probably -75% from the black death already until 1353), the beginning of the 15th century would find the albanian tags with 10-20k pops in total at most without any migration(the wars to come with the ottos or the rise and fall of Serbia would surely keep that to less than 10k). Not sure how the game would work like this. It seems other countries in Europe would probably almost completely depopulate too(ex. Greece after the black death and the ottomans or the German minors after the wars of religion). Maybe diseases affect mountains significantly less. Would be interesting to see a dev diary on pop growth and decline in more detail…
 
Last edited:
  • 2Like
Reactions:
With the current population numbers in Albania(probably -75% from the black death already until 1353), the beginning of the 15th century would find the albanian tags with 10-20k pops in total at most without any migration(the wars to come with the ottos or the rise and fall of Serbia would surely keep that to less than 10k). Not sure how the game would work like this. It seems other countries in Europe would probably almost completely depopulate too(ex. Greece after the black death and the ottomans or the German minors after the wars of religion). Maybe diseases affect mountains significantly less. Would be interesting to see a dev diary on pop growth and decline in more detail…
-75%? Where did you take that from? Even densely packed urban areas only had up to 50% population loss, but it more typically was around 30%
 
  • 3Like
  • 1
Reactions:
-75%? Where did you take that from? Even densely packed urban areas only had up to 50% population loss, but it more typically was around 30%
It’s just a worst case scenario based on the mortality of the bubonic plague. I don’t know how the devs have implemented it in game or how many pops typically die. As far as I know the plague killed up to 80% of Florence and 60% of Bremen. I think the 30% figure is more typical for the middle east, not Europe. Anyway, I am not sure about the numbers, it was just an assumption.
 
  • 2Like
Reactions:
Not gonna get my hopes up for any deep content for Epirus or Albania, and honestly, I’d rather the devs focus on fleshing out Byz and the Ottomans since that’s what most people will actually play. Even in EU4, Albania with Skenderbeu wasn’t particularly content-heavy despite its notable start.

That said, it’d be pretty cool if they added some flavor around dealing with Greek, Aromanian, and Albanian transhumant groups in the region. They played a huge role in shaping the region’s political landscape. They were hard to control, moved around a lot, lots of infighting between them, and plenty of raiding & rebellions whenever things got unstable. Would be interesting to see some sort of content around trying to fight them, offering concessions, or even integrating them into your armies.
 
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
Not gonna get my hopes up for any deep content for Epirus or Albania, and honestly, I’d rather the devs focus on fleshing out Byz and the Ottomans since that’s what most people will actually play. Even in EU4, Albania with Skenderbeu wasn’t particularly content-heavy despite its notable start.

That said, it’d be pretty cool if they added some flavor around dealing with Greek, Aromanian, and Albanian transhumant groups in the region. They played a huge role in shaping the region’s political landscape. They were hard to control, moved around a lot, lots of infighting between them, and plenty of raiding & rebellions whenever things got unstable. Would be interesting to see some sort of content around trying to fight them, offering concessions, or even integrating them into your armies.
Yeah, not really hoping for much either. After all, the league of Lezhe and Skanderbeg wasn’t exactly inevitable…
The most I am hoping for Epirus is 2-3 events on migrations(with options as you mentioned and one that establishes the albanian/arvanite principalities of Zenebishi and Arta/Shpata when Serbia breaks up), or something similar to the Invite german settlers option for Bohemia and Hungary. That should just be some lines of code, nothing complicated.
 
  • 3Like
  • 2
Reactions:
We received a ton of feedback in the main post to consider the Rusyn as the modern Ruthenian inhabitants of the southern side of the Carpathians, something that we've considered. The question here is if they should already be considered distinct in 1337, which is kind of doubtful.
The question is then distinct from whom? Halychians? I think your attempts at presenting more granular cultural tapestry runs the risk of misrepresenting Rusyn culture. Your overall presentation of a more dis-unified Ruthenian cultural sphere is correct in my assessment. But presenting people south of the Carpathians as Halychians is not. First off, modern day Rusyns are not the ancestors of a single migration wave east-west. Some of the ancestry dates back to the White Croats, some to the Wallachians and others to the Rusyns who migrated west as part of the Wallachian colonization into Hungary and Poland (will that event, btw, be represented in the game?). Francis Dvornik, an expert on early Slavic history, writes that the Byzantine Christian missions arrived to the White Croats in the south of the Carpathians almost a hundred years earlier than to the Rus. That is a major point of departure. Then you have the two Catholics unions (Brest and Uzhorod) which are active and separate to this day. Finally, consider what the people themselves thought. You will find dozensof towns named Ruske/a/y. How many towns named after Halycz? 0.
 
Last edited:
  • 1
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
I'm skeptical of this, because Rusyn still carry the name Rus derived from the Novgoridan Scandinavian Rus and are Orthodox, which doesn't seem likely if they were just Slavs that happened to live there when Hungary expanded around the 10th century.
That would actually be in line with other historical examples. Take the Romanians, as an example. The last Romans. Where do we find them? At the very periphery of the former empire. Or at the island of Lemnos, where one to one British traveler asking about the people's origin, the locals replied: "we are the Romans."

Rusyn, in this case, is not a nod to the Varangians from the north, but to the Byzantine mission from the south, which proselytized among the Slavs.

I write about this naming phenomenon in more detail here:
 
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
Upon looking into some sources, this is what I found about the origin of the term:

"From the 10th century onwards, Kievan Rus was referred to in Latin sources as Ruscia or Ruthenia, derived from the word Rus, and its inhabitants were called Ruthenians or Russians (Rutheni-Russi)." [Page 41]

"In the predominantly Latin-language sources of the 14th century, the Eastern Slavs living in the southwestern territories of the former Kievan Rus were called “Rutheni” or “Russi” and their lands were called “Rus-lands” or “Ukrainian” territories, the latter of which in the contemporary interpretation actually meant the border or ends." [Page 63]
"It is also important to highlight that the term "Rusyn" appeared relatively late, at the beginning of the 16th century, and only sporadically in some sources." [Page 64]


And how they arrived to the Kingdom of Hungary:

"The Ruthenians first appeared on the Hungarian side of the Northeastern Carpathians in 1254 on the border of Leszna and Csemernye (both in Zemplén County). István Szabó assumes that the Ruthenian people began to migrate to the mountainous region of the Forest Carpathians around the turn of the 12th-13th centuries." [Page 28]

"The Ruthenians first appeared in Máramaros in the middle of the 14th century. They first settled a valley section close to the mouth of the right tributaries of the Tisza." [Page 28]

"Ruthenians settled in large numbers under the leadership of the Lithuanian prince of Podolia, Todor Korjatovics, at the turn of the 14th and 15th centuries in the territory granted by King Sigismund of Luxembourg, in a part of Transcarpathia that cannot be precisely localized. Some authors date the settlement to 1365, but do not provide evidence for this." [Page 29]

Some additional population data from the 15th century when the Hungarian % was the highest in history:
"The population of the former counties of today's Transcarpathia in 1495 was 75,685 inhabitants in 21 cities and 592 villages in the four counties. According to ethnicity, he established the following proportions: Hungarian 51,900 (69%), Ruthenian 12,600 (16.8%), Slovak 5,300 (7.0%), Romanian 5,680 (7.5%)." [Page 29]


Frankly, I am more confused than I was before reading all this.
  1. Wouldn't the points above suggest that calling them Ruthenians would be more correct? Or is that what Halychian is supposed to represent?
  2. If the Ruthenian migration started slowly near the border around 12-13th centuries, does that already make them a distinct culture by the start date?
  3. Also, if the major settlements only happened later, does that mean that they are actually overrepresented in the region?
How did Attila extract ethnic information from the 15th c data? As far as I'm aware the earliest data about the ethnic make up of Hungary comes from the early 19th c. when ethnicity and nationalism was gaining traction.

As far as the Rusyn/Ruthenians go, the earliest ancestors, White Croats predate Hungarian settlement. We can speculate to what degree they remained as a viable population in the Carpathian region after the migration south (into Croatia) and later on after the Magyar conquest, but it's pretty reasonable to assume that the region was not completely depopulated and that there were some remnants of Orthodoxy upon which later Rusyn migrations built.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Which is the same as my 3rd, you just claim that the Pre-Rusyn, Pre-Hungarian population remnants in the area, who were Slavs, must be viewed as ancestors of the Rusyns, even though the process you mention is basically "complete replacement of language, identity, name, religion etc. with potential genetic elements surviving".

Which might be the case, though in that case it's a bit of a "Theseus' Ship" situation.


You could argue that genetically, the modern Rusyns are probably related to, and descendants of, earlier Carpathian Slavs in this area, but so are Slovaks, Hungarians, Romanians, and Carpathian Germans too. So deep inside, we are all Rusyns
As Michal Hudak says: we are all Rusyns. We just don't know it yet.
 
  • 2Haha
  • 1Like
Reactions:
It's questionable whether the orthodoxy came pre-hungarian conquest via Cyril & Methodius or later with any immigration from across the Carpathians. Bottom line, I think we can agree that the original Slavic majority population has been present there, whether called Rusyn or Ruthenian in the game. And they should also be the largest minority in Sáros/Šariš county, far ahead of Hungarian (who historically only ever were a single digit minority in that area).
It is questionable. You will find historians arguing both sides. Most likely scenario is that Orthodoxy arrived quite early from Moravia, survived in the mountainous northeast and was bolstered by the succeeding waves of migrants from the east beginning in the 13-14th c.

The countervailing idea, that there were no orthodox by the time of the Wallachian colonization and that the Orthodox Rusyn migrants were able to convert Catholics en mass in Urban centers like Uzhorod and Mukacevo doesn't seem very likely given the low status of transhumance shepherds devoid of any landed elites to back their faith. The conversions at that time were top to bottom not the other way around.

None of this is, however relevant to the question at hand. That is whether it's accurate to call these people Halychians. Given all we know, it isn't.
 
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions: