Anachronisms

[bertram boso]

I'm sure there's already been a thread on this but I just joined the forums and didn't want to troll through the threads to find it....but, am I alone in thinking that there are more historical anachronisms in MTW2 than in its predecessors? One of the things that initially got me hooked on the series is that the creators are usually scrupulous about their research.
Some examples of what I'm talking about were immediately evident when I first started playing: Venice took Crete from the Byzantines in 1204, in the wake of the Fourth Crusade, yet Venice has the island at the start of vanilla play, in 1080. Similarly, the kingdom of Portugal didn't come into existence until 1147, when crusaders on the way to the Holy Land for the Second Crusade stopped off to take Lisbon from the Muslims, yet Portugal is a kingdom in 1080...and also has Pamplona and the kingdom of Navarre, for reasons that are well beyond me.
I'm of course being pedantic, but I'm a medieval historian by training so it irks me....I'm curious if anyone has noticed more anachronisms.

[painter]

A flash version of a map of Europe every 100 years from 1 to 2000 AD, sourced from Reddit.

It may not be fun for most players to play a historically accurate initial map.

[bertram boso]

Yeah, I know; I wasn't really advocating strict historical accuracy, just commenting.

[FootSoldier]

Well, the game set up is an approximation of the situation in 1080, and some of it is just wrong - like Crete. Curiously most of it was right for M1TW, but I guess CA wanted the game to be more balanced between each faction. It's pretty good as it goes, but there might be a mod that puts a lot of these right. Many of the mods add places and factions shown as rebel or missing from this game. CA have given people the option to mod, and someone else might know of the most historically accurate.

The problem then is to keep a balance - how do you make the small states strong enough, and the empires "weak" enough. They also responded to opinion on the forums that, for example, wanted Portugal to be a playable faction from the start. Another issue is that boundaries were so fluid that it makes a difference even if it was 1078 or 1082 (e.g. Durazzo was Byzantine, taken by Robert Guiscard, Norman Duke of Apulia in 1082, regained by the Byzantines 2 years later from Bohemond - later Prince of Antioch - the son of Robert Guiscard).

The empires are misleading, of course. Byzantium was internally divided and fragmented. The HRE was a collection of kingdoms, dukedoms, nobles etc who were often at war amongst themselves, and wouldn't let the Emperor have enough money to go conquer Europe. As you drill down into the situation it just gets more complicated, e.g. the English King was also Duke of Aquitaine and Anjou (as well as Caen/Normandy), so should have control of these territories too, BUT, they were separate titles from his title of King of England, and he was vassal to the King of France for those places. The French King at the time was too weak to run France as a nation state.

The games designers have made lots of places "rebel" that weren't.

So very broadly here's a few:
- Bordeaux/Aquitane should be English
- Angers/Anjou should be English
- Dijon/Burgundy in 1080 was part of the HRE (though part of it was French)
- Marseilles/Provence in 1080 was part of the HRE
- Genoa was a separate state from Milan, and independent
- Milan should be part of the HRE (or rather the Emperor was also King of the Lombards, as a separate title)
- the HRE should have a port (Trieste) between Venice and Zagreb.
- Hamburg was part of the HRE
- Antwerp was part of the HRE
- Zaragoza was part of the Kingdom of Aragon
- Toledo was taken by Leon/Castile in 1085, so not yet in 1080
- the Amorovids (Moors is a European word) ruled Morocco and Cordoba
- Sicily and Naples were separate states (though ruled by the same family of Normans)
- the Byzantines still had fortresses in the Naples region in 1080
- Durazzo was Byzantine in 1080, but lost to the Normans/Sicilians in 1082, and regained again
- Sofia/Bulgaria was ruled by the Byzantines in 1080
i- Trebizond was Byzantine in 1080
- Jerusalem and Acre were Fatimid Egyptian in 1080
- Antioch was Byzantine till 1078, then Armenian for 6 years, then Seljuk Turk in 1086

And so on. If you consider Portugal to be the County of Portugal, rather than a kingdom, it works

Someone might post a really historical mod, if such a thing is possible ... there's no good date to fix as a start date ....

[Czin]

If you want a historically accurate game, download and play the stainless steel mod.

[Miroslav Klose]

If you want a historically accurate game, download and play the stainless steel mod.

Or Europa Barbarorum

No, I'm really eager to play the Dominion of the Sword Ubermod.....

[Escuratii va bene]

Well, the game set up is an approximation of the situation in 1080, and some of it is just wrong - like Crete. Curiously most of it was right for M1TW, but I guess CA wanted the game to be more balanced between each faction. It's pretty good as it goes, but there might be a mod that puts a lot of these right. Many of the mods add places and factions shown as rebel or missing from this game. CA have given people the option to mod, and someone else might know of the most historically accurate.

The problem then is to keep a balance - how do you make the small states strong enough, and the empires "weak" enough. They also responded to opinion on the forums that, for example, wanted Portugal to be a playable faction from the start. Another issue is that boundaries were so fluid that it makes a difference even if it was 1078 or 1082 (e.g. Durazzo was Byzantine, taken by Robert Guiscard, Norman Duke of Apulia in 1082, regained by the Byzantines 2 years later from Bohemond - later Prince of Antioch - the son of Robert Guiscard).

The empires are misleading, of course. Byzantium was internally divided and fragmented. The HRE was a collection of kingdoms, dukedoms, nobles etc who were often at war amongst themselves, and wouldn't let the Emperor have enough money to go conquer Europe. As you drill down into the situation it just gets more complicated, e.g. the English King was also Duke of Aquitaine and Anjou (as well as Caen/Normandy), so should have control of these territories too, BUT, they were separate titles from his title of King of England, and he was vassal to the King of France for those places. The French King at the time was too weak to run France as a nation state.

The games designers have made lots of places "rebel" that weren't.

So very broadly here's a few:
- Bordeaux/Aquitane should be English
- Angers/Anjou should be English
- Dijon/Burgundy in 1080 was part of the HRE (though part of it was French)
- Marseilles/Provence in 1080 was part of the HRE
- Genoa was a separate state from Milan, and independent
- Milan should be part of the HRE (or rather the Emperor was also King of the Lombards, as a separate title)
- the HRE should have a port (Trieste) between Venice and Zagreb.
- Hamburg was part of the HRE
- Antwerp was part of the HRE
- Zaragoza was part of the Kingdom of Aragon
- Toledo was taken by Leon/Castile in 1085, so not yet in 1080
- the Amorovids (Moors is a European word) ruled Morocco and Cordoba
- Sicily and Naples were separate states (though ruled by the same family of Normans)
- the Byzantines still had fortresses in the Naples region in 1080
- Durazzo was Byzantine in 1080, but lost to the Normans/Sicilians in 1082, and regained again
- Sofia/Bulgaria was ruled by the Byzantines in 1080
i- Trebizond was Byzantine in 1080
- Jerusalem and Acre were Fatimid Egyptian in 1080
- Antioch was Byzantine till 1078, then Armenian for 6 years, then Seljuk Turk in 1086

And so on. If you consider Portugal to be the County of Portugal, rather than a kingdom, it works

Someone might post a really historical mod, if such a thing is possible ... there's no good date to fix as a start date ....

wow how big was the HRE? Really was an empire in all senses then eh

[shikaka]

wow how big was the HRE? Really was an empire in all senses then eh

This big (the dotted border is under Konrad II):

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

One thing to note though.
This wasn't a state like today, or even during absolutist times.

If the emperor wanted war, he had rights to ask for a vote, where his vassals _voted how many troops he can take, and they are willing to fund, and under what circumstances he can use them_.
He also received imperial tax from all lands, but not all of the income. He couldn't tell the duke of Austria that 'you should demobilize your army, and invest in building a cathedral' and things like that...

[FootSoldier]

Great map, especially if you speak German! :d

The map shows the Kingdom of Italy separately within the HRE - the title was King of the Lombards around game start.

If you look at this map you will see the game objectives of the HRE. They will try to get all these territories. If you want to ally with them then holding any of these territories will cause problems - the infamous "backstab".

For example, if the HRE get Dijon their next objective is Marseilles. They won't go after Paris.

[ByzantineCaesar]

I've another one: Caffa should be called Theodosia and the Roman (Byzantine) Emperor should be Nikephoros III Botaniates, not Alexius I Komnenos, who was enthroned in 1081, aged 30 (he has 45 years in M2TW). Also, Anna Komnenos and Prince John Komnenos hadn't been born by 1080.

[bertram boso]

Great map, especially if you speak German! :d

The map shows the Kingdom of Italy separately within the HRE - the title was King of the Lombards around game start.

If you look at this map you will see the game objectives of the HRE. They will try to get all these territories. If you want to ally with them then holding any of these territories will cause problems - the infamous "backstab".

For example, if the HRE get Dijon their next objective is Marseilles. They won't go after Paris.

Yeha now that I think about it, the county of Provence (the Marseilles territory in the game) actually was part of the HRE until the late Middle Ages. The first MTW showed this by giving the HRE Provence.

[Shasqua]

The fluted plate for generals in 1080 is especially glaring. Steel crossbows are used by merc crossbowmen centuries before their invention.

[bertram boso]

@Footsoldier & shasqua-thanks for pointing these out!
@czin-yeah, I've been reading the Skantarios AARs and they have me pretty amped to play the stainless steel mod. I plan on devoting my next day off to getting it up and running.

[shikaka]

Everyone knows this, and it is not a big problem.
For example in M1, there was an Egypt country, in Rome there was a 'nation of unified gauls' and 'unified germans', in M2 there is Portugal, Spain (not Castille, León!), etc.

I think most is done to balance things out (HRE would be too strong and Genoa would be too weak if historically set up correctly) or because of lack of research (all of eastern europe)

- Bordeaux/Aquitane should be English
- Angers/Anjou should be English

So those lands are not 'english' but personal holdings of a normann (who happens to be the english king).

Actually the 'dual vassalisation' existed back then if you had land in more then one kingdom.
In this case - as I understand - the english king was a vassal of the french king but only with his holdings in France, England itself was not a vassal of France of course.

[Medkirtys]

Stainless Steel aims to be a historical mod, it actually does it pretty well, but the game has limits, so even mods like that can't have 100% accuracy

[Silverheart]

I think the rebel lands that should logically be HRE or Byzantine are the way in which the game shows how divided those countries were.
Like, officially Trebizond belonged to the Byzantines, but it was made independent so as to show some degree of the empires internal strife.

Of course, it´s not historically correct, but at least they´ve tried to show it Somehow.

[FootSoldier]

What makes historical accuracy so difficult is that boundaries and loyalties were mostly determined by dynasty, not by geography, and many boundaries and loyalties were contested. Then the most important thing was the family you belonged to, and what titles you controlled.

So yes, the HRE was enormous (the eastern remainder of the empire of Charlemagne), but there's a big BUT. It wasn't a country, and the Emperor's power was limited. It was a collection of countries, and within the HRE were numerous kings, dukes, counts etc. many of whom were rivals to the Emperor, or simply ignored him. To be eligible to be Emperor he needed to be a king, duke etc. in his own right. On top of that, different areas kept rebelling.

The Emperor couldn't raise troops as he does in M2TW. He had to beg, borrow, steal, plead etc, and often used troops from his own lands, or made alliances within the HRE, or with other factions. Many "subjects" would refuse to help him militarily.

This is obviously difficult to show in a game like M2TW.

"France" was the remains of the western half of Charlemagne's empire, and the history is a confusion of wars and rebellions. At the game start the King of France was incredibly weak, weaker than the HRE, and really only controlled the area around Paris.

Also, at the game start it is arguable if Aquitaine/Bordeaux and Anjou/Angers owed allegiance to the French King. They should probably both be "rebel".

shikaka is right - the dukes of Aquitaine (bordeaux) and of Anjou (Angers) did become vassals of the French king, and these areas were not "English" as such at the game start. It's a stretch to consider them French, too. The area includes Gascony, Poitou, and other places, and at different times they were independent. As I said at the start, it was marriages and inheritance of titles that controlled who controlled them.

They became "English" in 1152 after Eleanor of Aquitaine married Henry II Duke of Normandy, grandson of William the Conqueror, AND he became King of England - the first "King of England". (Before that the title was "King of the English".) The titles were thus combined in one family. This was Eleanor's second marriage - she was married to the French king before that - and her most famous son is Richard the Lionheart.

After this Aquitaine and Anjou were controlled by the English king, had brief periods of independence, and Bordeaux didn't come under the "control" of the French king until around 1450. French troops didn't actually enter the city until around 1650, so some date this as when it became part of France.

Again, this sort of patchwork of loyalties is difficult show in a game that relies on having separate unified factions and lands. I think the CA team did an amazing job, for all the flaws that the people like grumble about (including me).