Magnificiently compiled! Very nice
I hope they’ll look a bit more into polishing the region before next week’s Hungary TF. I hope there will be content for establishing Banates on the Balkans
- 2
-
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.
I hope they’ll look a bit more into polishing the region before next week’s Hungary TF. I hope there will be content for establishing Banates on the Balkans
Alright, did a wee bit more research on the situation for Ragusa.
If the devs are looking to add another location here, that would be the setup. I don't imagine any of these locations fall under the usual guidelines for locations size (Metković to the northwest is about the same size as Slano would be). Otherwise, Slano should either belong to Bosnia (to represent the sale of Slano to Ragusa in 1399) or to Ragusa (to represent the sale of Ston to Ragusa in 1330).
The current setup, with Slano belonging to the Venetians, is wrong under either interpretation. Either it goes to Ragusa, or Bosnia, or a third location is carved out and it is divvied up as I specified above. Additionally, Korčula belongs with Brač.
- Ston and the Pelješac peninsula, sold to Ragusa by Serbia. Could just call it "Pelješac" in reference to the peninsula or "Ston" in reference to its main city
- Slano; held by Bosnia and sold to Ragusa in 1399. Could just call it "Primorje", but this runs into the issue that the term primorje is just the South Slavic term for a littoral region, so the term might be a bit on the vague side
- Ragusa itself; making a concession to reasonable location sizes and giving it Konavli (as the current setup presently does)
- Brazzo should include the island of Korčula but not Lastovo
If the devs are looking to add another location here, that would be the setup. I don't imagine any of these locations fall under the usual guidelines for locations size (Metković to the northwest is about the same size as Slano would be). Otherwise, Slano should either belong to Bosnia (to represent the sale of Slano to Ragusa in 1399) or to Ragusa (to represent the sale of Ston to Ragusa in 1330).
The current setup, with Slano belonging to the Venetians, is wrong under either interpretation. Either it goes to Ragusa, or Bosnia, or a third location is carved out and it is divvied up as I specified above. Additionally, Korčula belongs with Brač.
Last edited:
- 12
- 2
Northern Greece seems a bit big. Maybe it could be split into Central Greece, Thessaly, and Epirus? Or Albania and Northern Greece.
- 3
- 2
Agreed.
Provinces of Illyria, Albania, N. & S. Epirus should become their own Area under the name Illyria. (rename the province of Illyria into Shkoder if the Devs have an internal naming rule against having provinces and areas with the same name....)
The other half of N. Greece Area, with the provinces of Thessaly, Neopatrtas, Attica, Aeotolia and Ionian islands, should be renamed into Hellas.
Last edited:
- 2
- 1
Alright, one more thing, but this one is much more easy to address because it's just me being very pedantic over naming.
"Kitsabis" is a very Greek name for a location owned by a Slavic country. Enough so that seeing it on the location map sticks out like a sore thumb; "ts" is not something you ever seen written in South Slavic, since "c" is literally that. Going off of this bit regarding medieval Greek phonetics and standard Slavic transcription, I imagine it would be better written as "Kicavis". I believe the modern writing of that location's name is Kičevo, but I don't know whether that was a name that was reached in 1337 or whether it had to pass through Greek->South Slavic->Turkish->South Slavic (again) to get there. So, to err on the side of caution, "Kicavis" would suit that location much better than "Kitsabis" for localizing it under rule by any South Slavic language-speaking culture.
"Kitsabis" is a very Greek name for a location owned by a Slavic country. Enough so that seeing it on the location map sticks out like a sore thumb; "ts" is not something you ever seen written in South Slavic, since "c" is literally that. Going off of this bit regarding medieval Greek phonetics and standard Slavic transcription, I imagine it would be better written as "Kicavis". I believe the modern writing of that location's name is Kičevo, but I don't know whether that was a name that was reached in 1337 or whether it had to pass through Greek->South Slavic->Turkish->South Slavic (again) to get there. So, to err on the side of caution, "Kicavis" would suit that location much better than "Kitsabis" for localizing it under rule by any South Slavic language-speaking culture.
- 2
- 1
There is a "ts" transcription in South Slavic, that being in Bulgarian. Other than that however, the location was at that time in Serbia, so it should adhere to how transcriptions are commonly recognised in Serbo-Croatian.
The overall naming and transcription in the area is all over the place, I hope we would see some much needed changes in this regard, among others of course.
- 2
- 1
- 1
just dynamic name localization that hasn't been done yet.... I would suggest you make a list of all the places with all the relevant names in different languages.... but who knows if it's worth your time since it will be read and forgotten about
well, I am still of the opinion that for true Immersion, languages and alphabet should change as well so you would get: Kίτζαβις, Кичево, Kërçovë, Kičevo .... depending on the language.... and not this monstrosity of Kitsabis
well, I am still of the opinion that for true Immersion, languages and alphabet should change as well so you would get: Kίτζαβις, Кичево, Kërçovë, Kičevo .... depending on the language.... and not this monstrosity of Kitsabis
- 4
- 1
On another orthography note, similar to the above that I mentioned:
Dukagjini is, again, an odd one to see. However, this one is odd due to iotation; you aren't going to see "gj" show up in Serbo-Croatian. Should be Dukađini, since gj in Albanian orthography represents the same phonetics as đ in Serbo-Croatian (whereas if this was a case of iotation, it'd actually be ž).
Presumably this one's a case of missing localization since Dukagjini would be the English localization.
Dukagjini is, again, an odd one to see. However, this one is odd due to iotation; you aren't going to see "gj" show up in Serbo-Croatian. Should be Dukađini, since gj in Albanian orthography represents the same phonetics as đ in Serbo-Croatian (whereas if this was a case of iotation, it'd actually be ž).
Presumably this one's a case of missing localization since Dukagjini would be the English localization.
- 3
- 1
- 1
Has had me stumped for a bit:
Now, the name itself is fine in the sense that there's no orthography problem. Rather, the issue is that this name, far as I can tell at least, is a term that originates from Ottoman times. The closest I could find for a name of this location would be Trebopolje, which is still a bit of a stretch (it covers the northwestern portion of the location) but at least it's within the borders of the location and is old enough to exist in 1337.
Now, the name itself is fine in the sense that there's no orthography problem. Rather, the issue is that this name, far as I can tell at least, is a term that originates from Ottoman times. The closest I could find for a name of this location would be Trebopolje, which is still a bit of a stretch (it covers the northwestern portion of the location) but at least it's within the borders of the location and is old enough to exist in 1337.
- 4
- 1
Someone make me stop.
So, two locations this time. I'll start with the bottom: I literally cannot find what "Zemlungrad" is supposed to be, at all. Not on any maps, not on Wikipedia, not on modern maps (literally no hits on Google maps, no less). Is this meant to refer to Zemen and the "Zemlengrad" it is named after? Feel like that would be better off replaced with Pernik, which was more relevant and still on the correct side of the Vitosha.
"Tsaribrod", of course, has the first natural problem of "Ts"; at a minimum it should be "Caribrod". Two, obviously Serbia isn't an empire in 1337. Three, far as I can tell the city was only even called that since the 16th century and quite possibly didn't even exist prior to then. I feel like Sukovo makes more sense?
So, two locations this time. I'll start with the bottom: I literally cannot find what "Zemlungrad" is supposed to be, at all. Not on any maps, not on Wikipedia, not on modern maps (literally no hits on Google maps, no less). Is this meant to refer to Zemen and the "Zemlengrad" it is named after? Feel like that would be better off replaced with Pernik, which was more relevant and still on the correct side of the Vitosha.
"Tsaribrod", of course, has the first natural problem of "Ts"; at a minimum it should be "Caribrod". Two, obviously Serbia isn't an empire in 1337. Three, far as I can tell the city was only even called that since the 16th century and quite possibly didn't even exist prior to then. I feel like Sukovo makes more sense?
- 3
- 1
It's findable easily enough on Google. One example (AI translated): "This monastery is to be curated amidst the Zemen Gorge on the bank of Strouma River to two kilometers southwest of the town of Zemen, District of Radomir. Some 6 km west of it there towered a medieval fortress called Zemlungrad." Clearly an alternate transliteration of Zemlengrad. I think it's this on Google Maps, and the series of fortresses seems to then continue south. There's some more detailed info on this site.
Last edited:
I don't know how strict they are about the settlement exit at start date or not. Because Novo mesto and Kočevje don't exist in 1337, and I also pointed this out, but it was not taken into account.
Yeah, I saw that. I still think Pernik would be a better choice here.
- 1
Well the problem, as I mentioned that not every territory managed to preserve it's original borders which once belonged to Kingdom of Hungary.
The counties' borders in Romania were redrawn and not just the counties, but Transylvania's border was changed too. As far as I remembered it has been changed sometime in the 1960-70's, but my fellow romanians who are reading this post could enlighten me on that.
Unfortunately many "history" games are following the today's administration borders of Transylvania which is false. But fear no more, many Hungarians don't know about this border change and I have seen "Greater Hungary" maps with these romanian shape. (yuck!)
You can see how small bits of Transylvania were given to Moldavians and Wallachian counties.
There is a cut in Transylvania, which looks like a "nose". In the Hungarian version it looks more like a C or a turned U shape, on the Romanian however its more like an L shape
Whats the verdict?
- 1
Surely, this is the way to achieve true immersion! Btw my father comes from Kërçovë and we dont call it kitsabis. But again this will be in the sacred archives of " things we totally considered".just dynamic name localization that hasn't been done yet.... I would suggest you make a list of all the places with all the relevant names in different languages.... but who knows if it's worth your time since it will be read and forgotten about
well, I am still of the opinion that for true Immersion, languages and alphabet should change as well so you would get: Kίτζαβις, Кичево, Kërçovë, Kičevo .... depending on the language.... and not this monstrosity of Kitsabis
The name “Dukagjini” does not follow typical Serbian naming conventions. While Serbian noble titles often include Slavic elements like -ić or -ović (e.g., Branković, Petrović), Dukagjini aligns with Albanian phonetics and morphology.
As for the identity there is no need for me to reinforce it because there is plenty already, (e.g. Kanun of Lekë Dukagjini), a defining part of customary laws that can be referenced in Albanian society ect.
Edit...
The argument you are making is based on phonetic transcription rather than historical or linguistic origins. Essentially you are saying saying that if Dukagjini were a Serbian name, it would be spelled Dukađini because gj in Albanian corresponds phonetically to đ in Serbian (which makes a similar sound). However, there is a fundamental issue with this particular view let me explain;
Just because a sound in one language can be mapped to a different letter in another doesn’t mean the word belongs to both languages. Dukagjini is an Albanian name with Albanian etymology. If it were Serbian, it wouldn’t need “correcting” into Serbian phonetics—it would already exist naturally in Serbian sources, which it doesnt.
Last edited:
- 3
- 2
- 4
- 1
Authenticity, schmauthenticity, right?
But there is a twist, transliteration is supposed to bridge languages, not erase the sources identity.
- 2
One, this is literally the official transliteration from Albanian into Serbian's rules.
Two, caring about bridging languages rather than erasing the identity of the source? In the modern era, absolutely.
In the time period of this game? Need I point out the laundry list of utterly destroyed source identity of places renamed from Arabic into Spanish, or Greek into Turkish, or Greek into Serbian (at least for the duration of Serbian rule in Greece), and so on and so forth?
You are arguing for modern sensibilities for cultural erasure at a linguistic level in a game whose setting absolutely did not give a damn about the extent that they were doing all sorts of cultural erasure to the names of the places they ruled. Or should İzmit be renamed Nikomedya?
Like... I'm not asking for this to be the default. I'm pointing out that this would be the way that Serbia would write the name of that location in the event that they're ruling that location (which they are in 1337). If Albania is ruling it, it'd be Dukagjini. If Albania conquers Peć it'd rename to Peja. Devs even mentioned a game rule that you could make the naming reflect plurality culture rather than ruling primary culture. Also there'd no doubt be another option to turn such renaming off, in which case the location would just be Dukagjini.
- 5
- 4
- 1
- 1
If you dont care about such nuances in the game, then why bother with transliteration discussions at all? If the historical accuracy of cultural identity isnt a priority, then surely, just like in Europa Universalis IV and Victoria 3, players should simply have the ability to rename provinces as they wish after conquest. That would be the logical solution-problem solved.
But moving beyond language, the real issue isnt just how the name is written, but that Dukagjini itself is misplaced as a Serbian province in this period. The assumption that Stefan Dušan controlled Dukagjini is not supported by a single historical document. In fact, the absence of documentation is not just an argument from silence-it aligns with the geographical reality of the region. The Dukagjini area is mountainous and naturally fortified by the Albanian Alps, making large-scale northeastern invasions impractical during that era.
Additionally, the region remained Catholic despite 500 years of Ottoman rule, unlike much of central and southern Albania. This further proves the area’s historical resilience to external domination and cultural assimilation-if the Ottomans couldn’t fully subjugate it for centuries, why should it be assumed that Stefan Dušan did, especially with no actual evidence?
This isnt about nitpicking transliteration. The entire province is misrepresented on the map. The real issue isnt about how we spell Dukagjini-it’s about putting Dukagjini where it actually belongs.
- 6
- 2