In Hungary, there are two provinces named "Fehér". The red one should be called "Fejér."
- 8
- 4
- 1
-
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.
@Pavía, please take a second, closer look on the Carpathians, including the early analysis made by @Sulphurologist on the original post; it is sort of messy when it comes to hills, mountains and plateaus, even though it is nice to see that there are proper wetlands now
- 6
- 2
- 1
Bukelon should still be Byzantine, too, by the way. Agathoupolis as well, probably.
- 4
A few items for western Hungary:
1. Why was Szombathely chosen over Koszeg? The town was the seat of a powerful house and had royal town status before Szombathely. Koszeg also played an important role in stopping the Ottoman advance towards Vienna. Szombathely would be more important in the later half of the game, however, so I can see this setup as well. Alternatively, split the province to add Koszeg, with it being a hill province producing stone.
2. There should be more hill provinces in Western Hungary, perhaps Pecs as well as Papa or Tata.
3. Zalaegerszeg was refered to as just Egerszeg in 1337. The Zala was added in the 17th century. Similarly, Nagykanizsa was known as just Kanizsa. Also, the province locations seem a bit off, given Nagykanizsa is shown as further west.
Good work on this feedback!
1. Why was Szombathely chosen over Koszeg? The town was the seat of a powerful house and had royal town status before Szombathely. Koszeg also played an important role in stopping the Ottoman advance towards Vienna. Szombathely would be more important in the later half of the game, however, so I can see this setup as well. Alternatively, split the province to add Koszeg, with it being a hill province producing stone.
2. There should be more hill provinces in Western Hungary, perhaps Pecs as well as Papa or Tata.
3. Zalaegerszeg was refered to as just Egerszeg in 1337. The Zala was added in the 17th century. Similarly, Nagykanizsa was known as just Kanizsa. Also, the province locations seem a bit off, given Nagykanizsa is shown as further west.
Good work on this feedback!
- 8
Okay, but in this case Borsh Castle in Sopot was a relevant location - though if included it should be directly administered by Byzantium. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Borsh_Castle
- 1
.png){kind=avatar}
The Court language of Wallachia and Moldavian duchies and united Moldavian principality should be Old Church Slavonic or Bulgarian. Apart from use in the Slavic countries, Old Church Slavonic served as a liturgical language in the Romanian Orthodox Church, and also as a literary and official language of the princedoms of Wallachia and Moldavia, before gradually being replaced by Romanian during the 16th to 17th centuries.Court Language
In the 14th century, the use of the Slavonic language in the church already had a 500-year tradition, so Old Church Slavonic was adopted as an administrative language and a language of culture.
Here is the source about Wallachia
Moldavia:
Except for the Ruthenian-based documents addressed to Poland, the chancery documents are basically Church Slavonic shaped with Ruthenian infiltrations on the level of some fixed formulas, function words and few lexical items. Moreover, Slavonic letters sent to Transylvania show tiny Wallachian Slavonic influence, manifested by forms of Serbian chancery origin. Monastery charters combine CS-shaped Ruthenian formulas with Trinovitan Church Slavonic formulas, partly shared with colophons and inscriptions. Thus, the Moldavian written legacy shares common elements both with the Wallachian milieu (e.g. Romanian Cyrillic spelling of proper names, Romanian impact on morphosyntax, specific terminology etc.) as well as with a broader Ruthenian area (mainly the eastern part of the Polish-Lithuanian Union).
from source
The use of the Slavic language in Moldavian official and ecclesiastical contexts is exemplified through numerous medieval documents, including:
Feudal Charters and Grants: These include grants of privileges (жалованные грамоты), purchase agreements (купчие грамоты), and boundary documents (межевые грамоты), written in a form of Slavic that incorporated Middle Bulgarian and Serbian elements.
The earliest surviving Moldavian charter, dated 1374 and attributed to Iuga Koriatovych, is written in Slavic. It demonstrates the standardized phrases used in such documents, indicative of Slavic being the administrative language. These documents often included formulaic openings and closings unique to Slavic legal traditions, such as blessings invoking divine authority and standardized expressions of fealty and rulership.
here is the source on russian
However
There is a lot of claim stehst Bulgarian was used.
From wikipedia
It talks about middle Bulgarian. Old Bulgarian is another name for Old Church Slavonic.
This also begs the question: can Bulgarian and Old Church Slavonic be dialects of the same language or the idea here is to make a fully separate language which doesn’t „evolve“
Last edited:
- 8
- 6
- 3
- 2
Thanks for your effort!
I think, thak a couple of corrections are still needed in the Bukovyna region.
LOCATIONS
Cetatea Tetina and Chernivtsi are literally one location, the remnants of the Tetina castle are within the city of Chernivtsi. Please, rename Tetina to Onut, a historic Halician trade settlement existing there since the XII century.
The locations border can be redrawn to avoid those sausages and to better represent North/South Bukovyna division and provinces (later in the feedback).
The location to the west of Chernivtsi can be called Khmeliv - there is even a Spanish Wiki page about the castle - Fortaleza de Jmeliv
PROVINCES
The division between south and north Bukovyna is much more historic and relevant, I would recommend just a small correction.
Also you can call Marmaros province as Transcarpathia.
CULTURES
The historical division of North/South Bukovyna was relevant because of different population of these parts - North was dominantly Ruthenian, South was dominantly Romanian/Moldovan.
Here is an Austrian-Hungarian 1910 census map of Bukovyna population. Of course it is after the game time frame, but there can be clearly seen the 'border' where Ruthenian and Romanian population historically 'met' themselves:
As far as I know, there were no mass deportations or henocides of Moldovans/Ruthenians/Ukrainians in the area apart from regular warfare casualties.
This can be taken as the closest reference, so the Halychan/Moldavian majority cultures border should be shifted to the south to this line with minoritites present on both sides:
And by the way, you even portray Kosiv in Halych as Moldavian-majority, this never happened. That land was ruled by Moldova for a short time much later.
And in the census of 2001 there were only 4 romanian-speaking people in Kosiv out of 8k population (probably only one family). I understand that this is a modern-day reference, but it speaks for itself too that there was never any Moldovan majority around Kosiv:
But in general, I would use the 1910 map as a base.
UPDATE:
here @ibvfteh found sources that Slavic culture can be shifted even more to the south, based on the origins of the settlement names: His post
(could not insert as a quote in edit mode).
That actually all of the toponyms of the northern Bukovyna are of the Ruthenian Origin that heavily supports the fact the majority of pops there should be of Halychian/Ruthenian cultures:
LANGUAGES
The common and court languages should be changed to Ruthenian, respectively:
BTW, Church Slavonic and Ruthenian languages were widely used in Moldova as a court, lithurgy and chronicles languages too.
POLITICAL AND DYNASTIES
With the respective changes the dynasties in the region should be changed to Ruthenian.
Actually according to This book in the second half of the XIV century there was a continuous struggle between Moldova, Poland and Hungary for the northern Bukovyna that started after Poland had taken the Duchy of Halych. That can also mean that was not an integral part of Moldova at the very beginning because of mixed population. Some maps even show that land as a part of the Halicia-Volhynia in the XIII - XIV centuries:
So the problem is that noone knows what happened there in the first half of the XIV century.
I assume that in the game these lands can participate in the creation of Moldovan Principality with other lands and get Halychan as an accepted/tolerated culture.
I think, thak a couple of corrections are still needed in the Bukovyna region.
LOCATIONS
Cetatea Tetina and Chernivtsi are literally one location, the remnants of the Tetina castle are within the city of Chernivtsi. Please, rename Tetina to Onut, a historic Halician trade settlement existing there since the XII century.
The locations border can be redrawn to avoid those sausages and to better represent North/South Bukovyna division and provinces (later in the feedback).
The location to the west of Chernivtsi can be called Khmeliv - there is even a Spanish Wiki page about the castle - Fortaleza de Jmeliv
PROVINCES
The division between south and north Bukovyna is much more historic and relevant, I would recommend just a small correction.
Also you can call Marmaros province as Transcarpathia.
CULTURES
The historical division of North/South Bukovyna was relevant because of different population of these parts - North was dominantly Ruthenian, South was dominantly Romanian/Moldovan.
Here is an Austrian-Hungarian 1910 census map of Bukovyna population. Of course it is after the game time frame, but there can be clearly seen the 'border' where Ruthenian and Romanian population historically 'met' themselves:
As far as I know, there were no mass deportations or henocides of Moldovans/Ruthenians/Ukrainians in the area apart from regular warfare casualties.
This can be taken as the closest reference, so the Halychan/Moldavian majority cultures border should be shifted to the south to this line with minoritites present on both sides:
And by the way, you even portray Kosiv in Halych as Moldavian-majority, this never happened. That land was ruled by Moldova for a short time much later.
And in the census of 2001 there were only 4 romanian-speaking people in Kosiv out of 8k population (probably only one family). I understand that this is a modern-day reference, but it speaks for itself too that there was never any Moldovan majority around Kosiv:
But in general, I would use the 1910 map as a base.
UPDATE:
here @ibvfteh found sources that Slavic culture can be shifted even more to the south, based on the origins of the settlement names: His post
(could not insert as a quote in edit mode).
That actually all of the toponyms of the northern Bukovyna are of the Ruthenian Origin that heavily supports the fact the majority of pops there should be of Halychian/Ruthenian cultures:
LANGUAGES
The common and court languages should be changed to Ruthenian, respectively:
BTW, Church Slavonic and Ruthenian languages were widely used in Moldova as a court, lithurgy and chronicles languages too.
POLITICAL AND DYNASTIES
With the respective changes the dynasties in the region should be changed to Ruthenian.
Actually according to This book in the second half of the XIV century there was a continuous struggle between Moldova, Poland and Hungary for the northern Bukovyna that started after Poland had taken the Duchy of Halych. That can also mean that was not an integral part of Moldova at the very beginning because of mixed population. Some maps even show that land as a part of the Halicia-Volhynia in the XIII - XIV centuries:
So the problem is that noone knows what happened there in the first half of the XIV century.
I assume that in the game these lands can participate in the creation of Moldovan Principality with other lands and get Halychan as an accepted/tolerated culture.
Last edited:
- 21
- 5
- 1
I believe Northern Bukovina or Chernivtsi should be a separate province. There is no reason to merge them like this
- 9
Hopefully you settle for Kingdom somehow(although not sure if that’s possible given that the tag is a normal vassal). Otherwise I think it would be impossible for the player to restore the medieval Kingdom of Albania, given the population requirements for the rank upgrade. Would make it an interesting, albeit very difficult play through...
- 2
In Hungary, the province named "Szátmár" was misspelled. It is not "Szátmár," but "Szatmár."
- 5
- 4
- 1
Do not forget that Csángós should be present in Roman tooWhy is the distribution of the Ruthenian or Slavic population so low?
It should be from 25% to 40% of the entire duchy of Moldavia (Area of Moldavia) by different sources. I do not see this on the presented map at all.
Historically there was a big concentration of the Slavic population
Tivertsi and Ulichs are briefly mentioned in early Ruthenian manuscripts, 863 being the earliest reference, and 944 being the latest. The Primary Chronicle from the Laurentian Codex (the oldest copy) mentions that they lived by the Dniester and Danube down to the sea (evidently, the Black Sea).
The Hypatian Codex (later re-copy) replaces the Dniester with the Dnieper.
Igor's expeditions in 944, the latter year, are the last references to Tivertsi in early East Slavic manuscripts.
So the lands in our question were the edges of their habitat at worst.
View attachment 1221271View attachment 1221268View attachment 1221269View attachment 1221272
Next, come Bolokhovians
Some Romanian scholars argue that they were not Slavic but Romanian instead. Here I want to prove that they were Slavic
In official English sources, they are referred to as Bolokhovians. But in the Hypatian chronicle, they are called „Болоховьскими“, Bolokhovskimi so the nominative form is Bolokhovskiye - people of the region Bolokhov. There is a village called exactly like that in Western Ukraine(Bolokhiv), but it is probably not connected with Bolokhovian people. But it proves that it can be a Slavic name for the region/city
Their cities are also mentioned:
In this quote is one of the biggest mentions of Bolokhovians. It tells about Daniil Galitsky subduing Bolokhovians. He did it because Bolokhovians with Rostislavl Chernihovskiy have tried to claim the Halych principality. It mentions the cities of Bolokhovians that Daniil had captured: Derevic, Gubin, Kobud, the town of Kudin, Boz'skyj, and Djad'kov. As you can see, all settlements have Slavic names.
During the Raykovets settlement (which was destroyed in 1240) research, they found not only military equipment but also Slavic vases with mythological patterns, wooden materials with Slavic patterns, and graves that show the Slavic burial process. And there was nothing that had any strong resemblance to only Vlach/Romanian culture.
Mikhail, Prince of Chernihiv, and Iziaslav, Prince of Novgorod-Seversk referred to Bolokhovian princes as their "brothers", the text also mentions that the Bolokhovian princes had family ties with boyars of the Principality of Halych. Princes of one nation mentioning Princes of Bolokhovian people as brothers means they were their brothers, either literally the same predecessor or in the sense of Slavic people. It proves that Bolokhovians were part of the diplomacy of Slavic principalities. The rulers of Bolokhovians had Slavic roots.
(Spinei 2009, pp. 161-162):
"...controversial is the ethnicity of the Bolokhovens, a population mentioned as living in the Rus region to the northeast from Moldavia.."
"..the idea that the Bolokhoveni were Rus is also supported by evidence of relations between Bolokhoven princes and Galician noble families...".
There are multiple variations of land they controlled
View attachment 1221275
The "Bolokhovian Land", according to Alexandru V. Boldur. He also says that the Bolokhovians were located southeast of the present-day town of Ushitsa
View attachment 1221274
Ovidiu Drimba - History of Romanian culture and civilization, Editura Ştiinţifică şi Pedagogică, Bucureşti, 1987, vol.2, pg.404
Right before the creation of the Moldavian principality, there was a lot of Slavic speakers
In Grigore Ureche's "Letopisețul Țării Moldovei" (1642-1647) edited in 1660-1670 by Moldavian chronicler Simion Dascălul there are mentions about the Slavic population in Moldova, living there, and becoming a part of new Moldavian duchy, while writing about the Moldavian legend of the foundation of Moldavia by Dragoș:
It claims that HALF of population was Ruthenian. But I believe its in a scence of approximate to that number.:
"Ruthenians made up half the country's population and the other half consisted of Romanians"
A similar version of this legend is also mentioned by Miron Costin (1633-1691) in "Polish verse history of Moldavia and Wallachia (The Polish poem)" (1684) and Nicolae Costin (1660–1712) in his "Letopiseţul Ţării Moldovei de la zidirea lumii până la 1601". Acc. to Miron Costin, Dragoș settled the Romanians in the fields, the Saxon artisans and Ruthenians near the mountains, his servants - on the plains below. He also settled the Ruthenians peasants from Pokuttya and Podolia; they populated Chernivtsi, Khotyn and the entire Dniester region, the counties of Orhei, Soroca and along the Prut River half of the Iași County, as well as half of the Suceava County.
Acc. to 1334 Franciscans Order's register, Ruthenian vicariate (vicaria Russiae) included 13 missions in such settlements: Lemburgae (modern Lviv) , de Grodech (Horodok), de Colomia (Kolomyia), de Galciff (Halych), de Nostin (Sniatyn), Cusminen (Valia Kuzmyna), Cereth (Serit), Moldaviae (Baia), Caminix (Piatra Neamț), Scotorix (Iași), Cotcham (Galați) , Licostoni (Kiliia), Albi castri (Bilhorod-Dnistrovskyi).
- Bullarium franciscanum romanorum pontifi cum constitutiones, epistolas, ac diplomata continens tribus ordinibus minorum, clarissarum, et poenitentium a seraphico patriarcha Sancto Francisco / [reverendissimi patris magistri L. C. de Signia]. T. 5. Apendix I. – P. 602, XLI
Map of areas of toponyms in the 14-15 century (so after the establishment of the Moldavian duchy, and for me after migration)
It is a detailed paper that was written by Lazar Polevoy (L. L. Polevoĭ)
View attachment 1221276
author analyzed the names of rural settlements of Moldavia in the 14th – mid-15th centuries and concluded that the East Slavic (Ruthenian) population of the entire Moldavian principality in the middle of the 14th century was 39.5%, and in the first third XV century – 26.5% (Polevoy 1979: 113).
According to geographer Vadzim Žučkevič, of the 151 names of rivers in Moldova and the Chernivtsi region of Ukraine, 72 are of Slavic origin, 24 are Romanian, 18 are Hungarian, and 7 are Tatar. Meanwhile, among populated areas, 57% are of Romanian origin, 29% are Slavic, and 7% are Turkic.
One more read about it: Суляк Сергей Георгиевич Русинская топонимика Карпато-Днестровских земель как источник сведений об этническом составе населения Молдавского княжества // Русин. 2018. №1 (51).
View attachment 1221280View attachment 1221281
he also outlines the cities that have Slavic names
A lot of cities in this region were listed in the List of Russian Cities, Far and Near(14th century). That means that there were a lot of people who could communicate in a Slavic language. Here is the map showing all the mentions. As you can see Bulgarian cities are included but Wallachians are not! Which means that it wasn’t based on religion.
View attachment 1221282View attachment 1221283
At the end of 40 pages of "civil discussions" I think we came to the best conclusion, to rely on toponymic analysis. The research was conducted for the middle of the 14th century
here I went deep into this research:
I believe the map should look closer to:
View attachment 1221287View attachment 1221288View attachment 1221293
As there was a HUGE concentration of Slavic villages of the 14th century in the Northern Regions and around Soroca and Orhei
View attachment 1221284
Chernivtsi is still a fully Slavic city, why is it here with a Moldavian majority? Even tho there are dozens of Slavic villages everywhere?
the description of my proposal (it also describes why I went with Crimean culture as majority in Budjak and Jasz minority):
On the sidenote
View attachment 1221289
It is too early for the Nogai population! I think it was not called like that before the split of the Nogai Horde in 1557 into the Lesser Nogai Horde (in Crimea) and the Greater Nogai Horde
- 4
- 2
i dont want to be that guy but i think these feedbacks that get feedbacks for more feedbacks are counter productive .
at one point this need to stop or else we getting stuck in this rabbit hole . there is so many regions and each correction take like 3 months . this is exactly the rabbit hole worldbuilders fall into when creating a setting , they become prisoners of the map and the lore and forget the initial story they were meant to deliver . same here , peoples are now after millimetric accuracy when instead we could be getting something more important like an actual improvement of gameplay or something bonus like a converter or a map maker or more sliders or simply a more stable game .
if this game release in an unstable fashion blame only yourselves , you can then say " at least we got an accurate map "
Last edited:
- 22
- 1
I disagree only on cultures as it is a modern view and there is information about older times. Still, it shows that the current map is too far away from the truth.
my proposal for cultures:
Why is the distribution of the Ruthenian or Slavic population so low?
It should be from 25% to 40% of the entire duchy of Moldavia (Area of Moldavia) by different sources. I do not see this on the presented map at all.
Historically there was a big concentration of the Slavic population
Tivertsi and Ulichs are briefly mentioned in early Ruthenian manuscripts, 863 being the earliest reference, and 944 being the latest. The Primary Chronicle from the Laurentian Codex (the oldest copy) mentions that they lived by the Dniester and Danube down to the sea (evidently, the Black Sea).
The Hypatian Codex (later re-copy) replaces the Dniester with the Dnieper.
Igor's expeditions in 944, the latter year, are the last references to Tivertsi in early East Slavic manuscripts.
So the lands in our question were the edges of their habitat at worst.
View attachment 1221271View attachment 1221268View attachment 1221269View attachment 1221272
Next, come Bolokhovians
Some Romanian scholars argue that they were not Slavic but Romanian instead. Here I want to prove that they were Slavic
In official English sources, they are referred to as Bolokhovians. But in the Hypatian chronicle, they are called „Болоховьскими“, Bolokhovskimi so the nominative form is Bolokhovskiye - people of the region Bolokhov. There is a village called exactly like that in Western Ukraine(Bolokhiv), but it is probably not connected with Bolokhovian people. But it proves that it can be a Slavic name for the region/city
Their cities are also mentioned:
In this quote is one of the biggest mentions of Bolokhovians. It tells about Daniil Galitsky subduing Bolokhovians. He did it because Bolokhovians with Rostislavl Chernihovskiy have tried to claim the Halych principality. It mentions the cities of Bolokhovians that Daniil had captured: Derevic, Gubin, Kobud, the town of Kudin, Boz'skyj, and Djad'kov. As you can see, all settlements have Slavic names.
During the Raykovets settlement (which was destroyed in 1240) research, they found not only military equipment but also Slavic vases with mythological patterns, wooden materials with Slavic patterns, and graves that show the Slavic burial process. And there was nothing that had any strong resemblance to only Vlach/Romanian culture.
Mikhail, Prince of Chernihiv, and Iziaslav, Prince of Novgorod-Seversk referred to Bolokhovian princes as their "brothers", the text also mentions that the Bolokhovian princes had family ties with boyars of the Principality of Halych. Princes of one nation mentioning Princes of Bolokhovian people as brothers means they were their brothers, either literally the same predecessor or in the sense of Slavic people. It proves that Bolokhovians were part of the diplomacy of Slavic principalities. The rulers of Bolokhovians had Slavic roots.
(Spinei 2009, pp. 161-162):
"...controversial is the ethnicity of the Bolokhovens, a population mentioned as living in the Rus region to the northeast from Moldavia.."
"..the idea that the Bolokhoveni were Rus is also supported by evidence of relations between Bolokhoven princes and Galician noble families...".
There are multiple variations of land they controlled
View attachment 1221275
The "Bolokhovian Land", according to Alexandru V. Boldur. He also says that the Bolokhovians were located southeast of the present-day town of Ushitsa
View attachment 1221274
Ovidiu Drimba - History of Romanian culture and civilization, Editura Ştiinţifică şi Pedagogică, Bucureşti, 1987, vol.2, pg.404
Right before the creation of the Moldavian principality, there was a lot of Slavic speakers
In Grigore Ureche's "Letopisețul Țării Moldovei" (1642-1647) edited in 1660-1670 by Moldavian chronicler Simion Dascălul there are mentions about the Slavic population in Moldova, living there, and becoming a part of new Moldavian duchy, while writing about the Moldavian legend of the foundation of Moldavia by Dragoș:
It claims that HALF of population was Ruthenian. But I believe its in a scence of approximate to that number.:
"Ruthenians made up half the country's population and the other half consisted of Romanians"
A similar version of this legend is also mentioned by Miron Costin (1633-1691) in "Polish verse history of Moldavia and Wallachia (The Polish poem)" (1684) and Nicolae Costin (1660–1712) in his "Letopiseţul Ţării Moldovei de la zidirea lumii până la 1601". Acc. to Miron Costin, Dragoș settled the Romanians in the fields, the Saxon artisans and Ruthenians near the mountains, his servants - on the plains below. He also settled the Ruthenians peasants from Pokuttya and Podolia; they populated Chernivtsi, Khotyn and the entire Dniester region, the counties of Orhei, Soroca and along the Prut River half of the Iași County, as well as half of the Suceava County.
Acc. to 1334 Franciscans Order's register, Ruthenian vicariate (vicaria Russiae) included 13 missions in such settlements: Lemburgae (modern Lviv) , de Grodech (Horodok), de Colomia (Kolomyia), de Galciff (Halych), de Nostin (Sniatyn), Cusminen (Valia Kuzmyna), Cereth (Serit), Moldaviae (Baia), Caminix (Piatra Neamț), Scotorix (Iași), Cotcham (Galați) , Licostoni (Kiliia), Albi castri (Bilhorod-Dnistrovskyi).
- Bullarium franciscanum romanorum pontifi cum constitutiones, epistolas, ac diplomata continens tribus ordinibus minorum, clarissarum, et poenitentium a seraphico patriarcha Sancto Francisco / [reverendissimi patris magistri L. C. de Signia]. T. 5. Apendix I. – P. 602, XLI
Map of areas of toponyms in the 14-15 century (so after the establishment of the Moldavian duchy, and for me after migration)
It is a detailed paper that was written by Lazar Polevoy (L. L. Polevoĭ)
View attachment 1221276
author analyzed the names of rural settlements of Moldavia in the 14th – mid-15th centuries and concluded that the East Slavic (Ruthenian) population of the entire Moldavian principality in the middle of the 14th century was 39.5%, and in the first third XV century – 26.5% (Polevoy 1979: 113).
According to geographer Vadzim Žučkevič, of the 151 names of rivers in Moldova and the Chernivtsi region of Ukraine, 72 are of Slavic origin, 24 are Romanian, 18 are Hungarian, and 7 are Tatar. Meanwhile, among populated areas, 57% are of Romanian origin, 29% are Slavic, and 7% are Turkic.
One more read about it: Суляк Сергей Георгиевич Русинская топонимика Карпато-Днестровских земель как источник сведений об этническом составе населения Молдавского княжества // Русин. 2018. №1 (51).
View attachment 1221280View attachment 1221281
he also outlines the cities that have Slavic names
A lot of cities in this region were listed in the List of Russian Cities, Far and Near(14th century). That means that there were a lot of people who could communicate in a Slavic language. Here is the map showing all the mentions. As you can see Bulgarian cities are included but Wallachians are not! Which means that it wasn’t based on religion.
View attachment 1221282View attachment 1221283
At the end of 40 pages of "civil discussions" I think we came to the best conclusion, to rely on toponymic analysis. The research was conducted for the middle of the 14th century
here I went deep into this research:
I believe the map should look closer to:
View attachment 1221287View attachment 1221288View attachment 1221293
As there was a HUGE concentration of Slavic villages of the 14th century in the Northern Regions and around Soroca and Orhei
View attachment 1221284
Chernivtsi is still a fully Slavic city, why is it here with a Moldavian majority? Even tho there are dozens of Slavic villages everywhere?
the description of my proposal (it also describes why I went with Crimean culture as majority in Budjak and Jasz minority):
On the sidenote
View attachment 1221289
It is too early for the Nogai population! I think it was not called like that before the split of the Nogai Horde in 1557 into the Lesser Nogai Horde (in Crimea) and the Greater Nogai Horde
- 3
- 1
Not... in love with the idea of Venetian being classified as part of the greater "Gallo-Italic" language. I'm sure you're all aware that the classification is somewhat disputed and you may not be splitting it for gameplay reasons, but I'd argue that Venetian was influential enough it should be its own thing.
Edit: Re-read and saw dialects are not done yet. Hope abounds!
- 3
- 2
- 1
I thought I would share some details I recently learned about Bulgaria and more precisely Dobruja during that time period.
For example, in northern Dobruja somewhere between 1332 and 1337 a vassal to the Golden Horde whith the name "Saqčï" was established, its capital being in Isaccea.
en.wikipedia.org
Another neat fact is that the region was already an autonomous despotate (first named Karvuna then Dobruja after independence) under Balik, a bulgarian noble, its autonomy being a consequence of frequent nomad raids from the Golden horde. That same Balik fellow officially broke away from the 2nd Bulgarian Empire just 3 years after the start date of 1337, so 1340, leading to some drama over the local patriarchate, wich ended up under the patriarchate of Constantinople.
en.wikipedia.org
Around the same time too (1332-1337), the Bulgarian emperor Ivan Alexander crowned his 3 sons as co-emperors, the eldest ruling from the capital with him and the 2 others ruling from Vidin and Preslav respectively (the latter near our good old Balik). All this happy family shenanigans ensured that the realm stood divided agains both the Romans and the Ottomans, something our friend Balik took advantage of, obviously! It is also one of the biggest causes to the collapse of the 2nd empire and the succes of the Ottomans, despite the solid alliance between Bulgaria and the Serbian Empire. These two remained allies even when picking different sides in the Byzantine civil war, if that's not bromance idk what is.
en.wikipedia.org
So, Bulgaria in 1337 is basically in 4 or 5 pieces: 1) the central government under Ivan and his eldest son; 2) and 3) the domains of his 2 other sons around Vindin and Preslav; 4) Karvuna/Dobruja under Balik; 5) Maybe a smol Saqčï around Isaccea as a vassal to the horde.
PS: This time period was chaotic for Bulgaria and I want to experience the pain as authentically a possible.
For example, in northern Dobruja somewhere between 1332 and 1337 a vassal to the Golden Horde whith the name "Saqčï" was established, its capital being in Isaccea.
Isaccea - Wikipedia
Another neat fact is that the region was already an autonomous despotate (first named Karvuna then Dobruja after independence) under Balik, a bulgarian noble, its autonomy being a consequence of frequent nomad raids from the Golden horde. That same Balik fellow officially broke away from the 2nd Bulgarian Empire just 3 years after the start date of 1337, so 1340, leading to some drama over the local patriarchate, wich ended up under the patriarchate of Constantinople.
Balik (ruler) - Wikipedia
Around the same time too (1332-1337), the Bulgarian emperor Ivan Alexander crowned his 3 sons as co-emperors, the eldest ruling from the capital with him and the 2 others ruling from Vidin and Preslav respectively (the latter near our good old Balik). All this happy family shenanigans ensured that the realm stood divided agains both the Romans and the Ottomans, something our friend Balik took advantage of, obviously! It is also one of the biggest causes to the collapse of the 2nd empire and the succes of the Ottomans, despite the solid alliance between Bulgaria and the Serbian Empire. These two remained allies even when picking different sides in the Byzantine civil war, if that's not bromance idk what is.
Ivan Alexander of Bulgaria - Wikipedia
So, Bulgaria in 1337 is basically in 4 or 5 pieces: 1) the central government under Ivan and his eldest son; 2) and 3) the domains of his 2 other sons around Vindin and Preslav; 4) Karvuna/Dobruja under Balik; 5) Maybe a smol Saqčï around Isaccea as a vassal to the horde.
PS: This time period was chaotic for Bulgaria and I want to experience the pain as authentically a possible.
Last edited:
- 11
- 2
- 1
Can we get a culture breakdown in Hungary? How many Transylvanians, Hungarians etc are there? Ideally, could we get one for the Transylvanian area?
- 3
How many tiers of vassalage can there be? Similar to CK3? There are 5 levels from baron to emperor.
- 3
Regarding Slovakia:
Given the fact that Greater Polish and Lesser Polish, with little to no dialectal differences are treated as separate cultures, then most certainly Albanian should be divided into two separate cultures
Also these locations should be home to the Tsakonian culture. Given one culture can have only one dialect, and Tsakonian is a specific dialect that developped from Doric rather than Koiné, it should be its own culture.
Also, should Maniots (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maniots) be a SoP in Oitýlo location?
- The raw good material of Prešov/Eperjes should definetely be SALT rather than gems. I am unaware of any gems being extracted in or around the city, while salt is known to have been produced in the area. Heck, even one of the biggest neighbourhoods is called Solivar(Salt+ Hungarian "vár"= castle)
- The culture of Trnava/Nagyszombat is oddly Hungarian with Slovak minority, which is doubtful at best
Given the fact that Greater Polish and Lesser Polish, with little to no dialectal differences are treated as separate cultures, then most certainly Albanian should be divided into two separate cultures
Also these locations should be home to the Tsakonian culture. Given one culture can have only one dialect, and Tsakonian is a specific dialect that developped from Doric rather than Koiné, it should be its own culture.
Also, should Maniots (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maniots) be a SoP in Oitýlo location?
- 11
- 3
- 2
- 2