Originally Posted by
Darios
The book you are quoting was written by one, István Vásáry. I cannot comment much on his education or historical studies, for all I know he is a man of considerable knowledge and talent. However, he is also Hungarian. Mind you, a Hungarian writing on the history of Vlachs is like a Russian trying to write the history of Ukraine. Beginning during the 19th century (during a period of intense Magyarization policies in the Austro-Hungarian Empire), it became popular for Hungarian academics to not only claim that the Huns were their ancestors, but that the Romanians/Vlachs were not native to the lands north of the Danube and had in fact, migrated northwards from Albania.
The irony of this is that the earliest Hungarian chronicle, the Gesta Hungarorum, mentions that Transylvania was inhabited by "local Vlachs and Slavs" when they first conquered the region.
It does sort of irk me that whenever a Westerner (Hungarians or Germans) argues something about Eastern Europe, it is accepted as academic without any nationalistic overtones (despite the territorial claims their peoples may have/had in the region), simply because it appears in a published book and that (Germans in particular) they are seen as a more 'familiar' source. If someone who represents the interests of "Balkans peoples" argues something, it is seen as whiny "they're suppressing our history" Balkans nationalism. It fails to analyze factors such as literacy or socio-economic status in the territory among the people being discussed. Romanian historiographic tradition is far younger than Hungarian, therefore Hungarian theories (nationalistic or not) concerning the region tend to get the benefit of being accepted as academic. What comes off as worse is that champions of the "immigrationist" theory (largely Hungarians) like to argue that if Vlachs indeed lived north of the river then "why didn't they write any books?"/"show me something academic to prove otherwise?!" knowing very well that Romanians were hardly literate before the founding of the Moldovan and Wallachian principalities during the 15th century. When they did began writing their own chronicles during the 17th century, they did not mention anything about immigrating into the region. Meanwhile in Transylvania, Vlachs under Hungarian rule were not given any political or economic rights and were essentially excluded from 'settled' society unless they converted to Catholicism and essentially "became Hungarian." Noticing a pattern here....?
In any regard, while I am certain that Vlachs lived in the region and constituted an ethnic majority, I find the idea for a 13th century Vlach faction to be extremely porous at best. In fact, seeing the ridiculous level that this thread has devolved to, I consider myself on the side of those arguing that there shouldn't be a Vlach faction in this mod.
Darious,I agree with you from academic stand point,but the real problems here with the Vlachs are others.I can tell you how it was reached the decision the Vlachs to be at the start of the Campaign map at turn 1 and where the problem was created.
If Someone dont know the real problem is Campaign AI for multible factions in Eastern Europe,Because who holds the Vlach regions Makes or Brakes the Campaign for multible factions in the East to act just like the Western and Eastern Roman Empires in Vannila Attila with no balancing. Some will be having Easy Campaigns vs the Campaign AI,others more harder campaigns than WRE/ERE with less regions(both player and AI) at the start.The most Broken are the Cumans when trying to fight at 4-5 wars in the first 10+ turns with regions no way of defending any of the core regions,because they dont have any - all of their Regions are border regions,Bordering 15 Factions as of Right now,and they were hated by most neighbours in the east.And As we all know how the Campaign AI in Attila loves to focus/prioritize only the player's faction like a lazer guided rocket this is a Huge Problem for some Factions(not only the Cumans) .And on top of that the Tatars/Mongols will got the respawning Army stacks just like the Huns in Attila's Grand campaign. A harder legendary Campaign than the WRE campaign with the Cumans isnt a good Design - its the opposite - a really bad design from Balancing reasons.
So where are the Vlachs in all this:
At the start Wallachia was a region under the direct rule of the Second Bulgarian Empire(Moldavian region is still given to the Cumans ) and after the decision to fragment the Latin Empire from holding 5 regions to having 3 regions and 2 Vassal factions I proposed doing the Same for the Second Bulgarian Empire's Lands north of the Danube for Campaign Balancing Pourposes against the Hungary's and the Latin empire's CAI and Helping the Bulgarian and Cuman CAI a bit more - Moldavia and Wallachia.
So why fragmenting of a Faction is better in the long term? Fast example:Why the fragmented Sassanids CAI with its vassals in Attila 95% beat the Eastern Roman empire CAI in the Middle east in the Attila Grand Campaign? Because by fragmenting a faction into Overlord and vassals there is more money per each faction,More max armies per imperium level ect.When you combine their forces/money budgets against an Unitarian Faction like the Eastern Roman Empire - This is why the romans loose. And there is another Reason - If one Faction is Too big it falls apart really fast when attacked by smaler factions - of the biggest problem for Attila's CAI after the Lazer Guided CAI,focused defeating the player's faction.A problem also pronounced in well in Rome 2 more or less with Factions like Rome and the Selucids.
Bulgaria was having 4 Regions at the time and I proposed Bulgaria to have core 3 regions and 2 vassals - Making the Moldavian and Wallahian emergent factions be at the start of the Campaign and be vassals to the Bulgarian Empire ,because of a Compromise Decision the Vlachs to be represented (for the Romanian players, who together with the Turkish fans were asking their nations berepresented in Medieval kingdoms 1212ad the loudest) both as part of the Bulgarian Empire and be factions of its own at Turn 1,but unplayable in the Campaign,but playable in the Custom/Multiplayer battles.From a Historical stand point the Second Bulgarian Empire until the Mongol/Tartar Hordes came in the 1240s always held them by form a Political vassalage the Vlachs and the Cumans in Moldavia and Wallachia and the Title of the Bulgarian Tzar was ''Tzar of the Bulgarians and Vlachs'' with the later addition of ''and Greeks''.The ruling Asen dynasty in the Second Bulgarian Empire even to the present day is debatable were they Bulgarians,Vlachs or Cumans in their origin so thats another Plus for maiking the Vlachs part of the Bulgarian Faction in the form of a vassals.After the Arival of the Mongol/Tartar Hordes the Hungarians,Bulgarians and the Tatars were competing eachother for that control over the Vlach lands and weakened themselfs and the Vlachs became slowly step by step Independant in the late 14th century with the Arrival of the Ottoman Turks in the Balkans. And by looking at the early unit rosters of the Bulgarians and the Vlachs the Cumans are represented in them well and there isnt a problem with the Question" Where were the Cumans in Moldavia and Wallachia in all of this?"
So... By taking the Moldavian region from the Cuman Faction ,the Campaign AI and the player dont have to deal with and the Balkan Factions and the Hungarians to the West and Focus on the Fighting the Mongol/Tatar Hordes to the east ,the Georgians to the south,The Rus to the North and the only more or less stable in Diplomacy with Volga Bulgaria.Also the Cumans will be Bordering not 15 Factions as of Right now,but only 10 - something that will be still the Hardest Campaign in Medieval Kinfdoms 1212ad,but more manageable and more fun overall against the already lazer guided focused CAI on waging the War against the player. Some people will say them "Wait what about the Relations between the Hungarians,Vlachs,Bulgarians and the Cumans at the start of the campaign?" A simple non-agresion pact between them with the Cumans can do the Trick,without trading with Moldavia on top of that.And of top of that the Cuman faction already got the unit'''Moldavian Warriors'' in its unit roster to represent their control over Moldavia
The other Big problem with the Cuman-Kipchack Khanate as a faction,that is represented in the mod by the name Cuman Khanate as a centralised Faction,but in fact it was nothing like that all.Im mather of Fact it was one of the most disunited realms in Europe before the arival of the Mongols. I have proposed also in the past to Fragment the Cumans also of having at the start 3 regions:Bilgorod,Tana and Sharukan and their other 3 regions of the Cumans in the east be given to the Kipchacks(unplayable faction on the campaign) and making them from emergant to be a starting faction in the campaign with the regions of Kyzul Qala,Saqsin and Derbent and making the Cumans and the Kipchacks Defencive allies represeenting the Cuman-Kipchak confederation as much as possible. And with this Move The Cuman Faction will be still be Bordering with 7 Factions. Another Plus of this aproach presesenting the Cumans is it will give time for the player will be giving them some time before the Mongols come and declare war on their Defencive allies - the Kipchacks.Will he go try to help them with the Mongos right Away or build his forses and buy some time before the Mongols declare war on the Cumans.
And Finnaly the Campaign AI for all factions in Eastern Europe will be balanced for both each CAI faction and each faction the player choses to play as.
As for Hungary if the Mod team wants to represent all of the Transylvanian etnic groups and dont want to give the Hungarian another 15 units in its already huge unit roster they can also make the emergant Transylvanian faction be also at the start of the Campaign as vassal to the Hungarians. In its roster Transylvanian faction can have Saxon,Cuman,Teutonic order(this way the biggest critism for the Teutonic order of being too early in the Baltic region in 1212ad will be fixed,without compromising their holdings in the Baltics right now)units and some Vlach units also,but dominantly their unit roster will be represented by the Hungarian units.No new units will have to be created.It will need only need a mixture of the already created units from the Hungarian,Cuman,Saxon,Teutonic order and Vlach units and all Transylvanian etnic groups will be represented in a balanced way for evrybody. At the end Hungary will be having 4 core regions with 2 Vassal states:Croatia with 2 regions and Transylvania with one.
As For the names of the Moldavian, Wallachian and Transylvanian factions I have been proposing always the names:
''Voivodeships of Moldavia''
''Voivodeships of Wallachia''
''Voivodeships of Transylvania''
Older Version of the Starting Campaign Map
The last update on the Starting campaign map.Over a year Ago.
Ok that was my proposals 2 years ago about the Eastern Europe. So what went Wrong? At the time jan_boruta was making those campaign maps.Close before he left the mod team in his last update of the maps (judging at looking at his lack of activity over the last year+,I may be wrong) he only took the idea of adding the Wallachian Faction into the starting campaign map and this didnt fixed the core problems with the CAI for all factions in Eastern Europe at all after he Fragmented the Latin Empire.So this is why we are in this place debating why the Vlachs this ,vlachs that... over and over again.
Also on the Campaign maps there are problems with some of the regions in the Iberia,2 of the Italian factions and I dont know if they will be addressed:
1)Pisa was controling both Corsica and Sardinia in 1212ad
2)Bolongna region being part of the Lombard league
3)Castile loosing 3 out of 4 of its regions:Kingdom of Leon having 2 northern regions and Badajoz be given to the Almohads,But Castile to have the Biggest starting Army out of all iberian Cristian Factions with Toledo at its Capital and single region.
4)The Valencia emergant factionto become a Vassal to the Almohads and its early tier 1 units be muslim Almohads units with later Tier 2 and later Tier units to be Cristian(Aragon units maybe) ones due to Muslim Fragmentation from the Almohads at the time and a little help for the Muslims in Spain before the smaller Iberian factions steamroll the Almohads.