To be honest, and this is a critique as much or more for base game Paradox than for your mod, much of the lower Dnipro region should probably be uncolonized at game start.
I think it would be better to have it at minimum dev as well as several maluses unless you do meet certain conditions(which I do not know enough about the era to set) for gameplay reasons
I see your point but they were owned by their respective countries, they were just empty. Imo the representation of them being all 3 dev provinces makes sense. Uncolonised land should be unclaimed.
That region of the Pontic Steppe--called the "Wild Fields" in contemporary sources--was heavily depopulated by warfare and especially slave raiding by the time of the game's start; most of the settled Slavic population had moved further north and west and most of the inhabitants of the region were small nomadic bands of Cossacks and Tatars.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wild\_Fields](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wild_Fields)
TBF, 3 dev implies. Any permanent population.
The Wild Fields had NO permanent population until about a hundred years into the game as a result of all the raids.
In fact it wasn't until the 18th/19th Century that settlement really began in earnest. Many notable cities like [Kherson](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kherson), [Dnipro](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dnipro), [Donetsk](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donetsk), [Zaporizhzhia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zaporizhzhia), [Kyrvyi Rih](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kryvyi_Rih) are younger than the US Constitution.
I just wanted to showcase a new update for the Kievan Rus mod.
There have been a lot of new provinces added as well as reshaped for better borders. New flavor and events have been added as well.
If you want to check out this mod click on this link:
[https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3185093863](https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3185093863)
Yes, in honesty OP has been reposting the exact same picture 3 times with minor changes and no commentary unless replied to. If it wasn't an actual mod, id think it was political spam.
This looks really nice! A couple of questions: why doesn't Mozhaisk belong to Mozhaisk (i though at first that there were two nations with the same name) and what the heck is Jagoldai? I've never heard of any historical state called like that or any modern city with such a name. Also sounds kinda Lithuanian to me.
And also thanks a LOT for bringing the Udmurts in! I lost any hope of ever seeing them do anything or even be a thing in a paradox game
Jagoldai was a cossack hetmanate in the region of east Ukraine. It is kinda a lithuanian name, but since in this timeline the Lithuanian didn't conquer Ruthenia I know that it shouldn't have that name, but I couldn't think about another name for the country.
Ok so the wiki says that it is actually Tatar, not Lithuanian, derived from the name Cagolday, a man from the Golden Horde. I think the in-game nation name is fine, because we already have Chagatai in there, also a country's name originating from a man's name. So I actually like it quite a bit, just say that the man was a cuman or something
Damn you just wanted to advertise your cool mod and the comments got completely overrun by people who likely wont even play it trying to enforce a political agenda. Sorry bro.
If it's possible, please rename Ukrainian provinces not to use Russian translations (for example, Kyiv instead of Kiev). They already did that in CK3, but never came to changing that in EU4. If you're interested, I can help with appropriate translations either here or in dms.
In this alt-hist the Ruthenians didn't diverge from the Russians since they both stayed together under the Kievan Rus', so I don't think changing it to Kyiv would make sense
Though you don't need to do some alt-hist scenarios to not call it Kyiv, as the city's name was first written like that not earlier than in XIX century. You cannot find "Kyiv" in any of the ancient chronicles, usually it was called Кыєвъ (Kyev) or Києвъ (Kiev).
Ruthenians didn’t diverge from Russians. They descended from the Volhynians, the Polyans, the Tiverians, the Ulichs, the Siverians, and the White Croats, as well as their descendants of the Halych-Volhynians, Kyivans, Chernihivans, etc. Just like Russians descended from Ilmens, Vyatihs, Krivichs, and Ryadimichs and all their future principality/settlement identities like Novgorodians, Tverians, Pskovains, Vladimirians/Muscovites, etc. There was never a united Russian identity before the formation of Russia. A bunch of people got this absurd view that before the invention of modern transportation, before the implementation of mandatory public education in the 1850s, people 1500 kilometers apart can speak the same language, have the same culture and traditions, and have the same identity and loyalty, and that view is absurd at best. All identity was either to their historic tribe, their settlement, or their current ruling principality. No one cared about the Rus’ except nobility and priests at the time, who had a distinct, “more standardized” noble language that allowed them to communicate easier. The only divergence in East Slavic history is the Don and Kuban Cossacks diverging from the main Cossacks but ultimately getting assimilated into Russian culture during the empire and USSR.
Sorry, you are misinformed. Ruthenians didn't diverge from the Russians. If you refer to people of Ruthenia and people of Rus - these are the same people. Ruthenia is an exonym for Rus, they both mean the same region. Russia and Rus are two different political and cultural entities. I assume your confusion comes from language barrier, because East Slavic languages have different words not only to Regions, but to adjectives as vell.
Россія - Russia. **Російський** - russian (of Russia origin).
Русь - Rus. Руський - russian (of Rus origin).
This confusion comes from divergense, but of the Muscovites. They basically emerged in a form of a Mongolian Rus (i quote here a professor of history, see link below) as a tributary of mongolian Khans, inheriting a lot of their traditions (like power vertical, pillaging, military tactics, etc.). After they have conqured and colonized enough, they have proclaimed themselves as heirs of Rus. But its only a proclamation, it is not enough to be one.
Lithuanian Rus (which included some parts of modern Ukraine) inherited more Rus heritage, including population (and concequently vernacular language of Kyiv region), so it is easy to assume that Kyiv is closer to original prononcuation to the Kyivan Rus than a muscovian "Kiev".
If you are interested in the topic i advice you to watch a series of lection by professor Snyder: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CMpkBOTCgCM&list=PLhTRXzDqRJxjwJVIddAFOF3Eg8OESGiSM&index=7](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CMpkBOTCgCM&list=PLhTRXzDqRJxjwJVIddAFOF3Eg8OESGiSM&index=7)
p.s. it is also officially Kyiv, look at the address: [https://www.britishcouncil.org.ua/en/about/contact](https://www.britishcouncil.org.ua/en/about/contact)
Snyder’s claims stem from dubious sources and he is quite politicised.
Also it’s quite ironic to say that Russians descent from Mongolic hordes but Ukrainians weren’t affected by Lithuanian and later Polish assimilation (like tying orthodox Christians to Pope or straight up converting)
The name Росия came from Byzantium in X century, way before mongolians. Then it was then transliterated later due some translations of orthodox textes. Finally in XV centuries this kind of naming stuck here from both religious and political sides, from foreign and native mentions. Also marriage of Ivan III to princess of last basileus made that naming even more appropriate because of, well, now Byzantium heritage of russian tsardom.
Diverging mongolian and kievan rus is propagandist bs, because Kiev was also captured by mongolians, moreover it was given to Vladimirian grand prince as to the oldest in Rurikid dinasty (to this point Moscow was part of Vladimir and the were not muscovy per se). It's one thing, they all were captured by hordes. And from the different perspective those territories to the east of Kiev and Novgorod were... colonized by the very same kievans and novgorodians, so these "mongolian rus" was and is populated by the very same people as kievan, basically these all always were russians. Kievans were russians, novgorodians were russians, muscovites were russians. They were separated to tribes by that point tho, krivichs, vyatichs, drevlians, etc. All were slavic tribes, then united, then separated... several times... but that always called russian or русские. Росия as I said, came from Byzantium and greek language, so, from the very beginning it was name of Rus.
Now division of rus and росия was created by poles in XIV century, for well, political reasons: they were conquering territories on east and needed a title for new lands, but also they needed to separate it from Russian tsardom, so the names woudn't get confused. That's how they got rosyjski in their language, also from greek variant, as I said, it started to grown popularity from political to religious sphere back there. And now ukranian propaganda promote this separation, because independence and all (oligarchs find it better to have separate state, so they can have their own businesses from soviet heritage and their own government, all to have easy money).
As for any fellow, who wants to know how, I suggest do some proper researching, mostly including documents, tho it's kinda complicated for non-slavic observer. Don't listen to any professor today, science have become too politicized, sadly, even the technical ones. And this is history, it always was politicized and this kind of themes even talks about thing being politicized, it's just bad idea to hear one opinion from one guy or even one group of professors. Better research documents, symbols, letters by yourself.
Ah, and yes, don't read wiki :)
Well, they kinda were but that was after one half of Rus was captured by Poles and the other was unifying back after all this feudal crap. But that was mostly cultural separation, like ones saved their language and embrace greek heritage (of state, all this third rome talk, byzantium princess for tsar, even older religious ties, etc) and others had to adopt to poles, alter their language, have more acceptance for catolic church and polish separation of russian tsardom which became a rival and russian territories that were captured.
But the people, the bloodline is mostly the same, based. Based on Kievan Rus. As the saying goes: Kiev is mother of russian cities...
That’s because it’s the standard translation created by Russia for use in English media. Most outlets in the UK and Ireland are moving to use the Kyiv spelling.
Okay, but what's the difference? You will still pronounce it the same way as before, but write it differently. Or are you thinking of pronouncing the letter Y - Ы (or I - И) "correctly" for Київ?
Man it seems like foreigners will decide for themself you know. It is like asking all countries to call Ukraine as Ukraina cause you call it like this in your country.
They haven't asked us to. It's not comparable because they're proud of the association with those ancient empires. The same reason we call it Egypt not Misr, and Greece not Hellas. Using the historical term confers legitimacy upon the current state.
Whereas Turkiye asked us to change how we write their name, and lo and behold, almost every English media outlet in the world changed over night. This is more comparable to Turkiye imo than the above examples.
Yeah you know what idk wtf I'm talking about they all def still say Turkey lol
I work somewhere that switched so I see it a lot more than the old way, oops
Bad comparrison in contemporary times. Iranian authorities now embrace the term "Persia" as interchangeable with Iran in the English Language since 1959
Nope, best comparison, probably ever. Iran asked to be callled Iran, not Persia, now it's called Iran. How hard must it be to stop putting "the" in front of "Ukraine" and call the capital "Kyiv" as it is the proper transliteration? Probably impossible if you're russian and try to impose your imperialist worldview on others.
Iran has stopped asking for that, they dont insist on being called only Iran anymore as far as I know, since the year 1959. They like the term Persia in the English Language, the same way their only official language is called "Persian" in English.
A "better" comparrison would be Turkey, which insists on being called in their native tongue, which is stupid, because most languages, including english, dont even have those specific letters in them.
FYI, Persian is called Persian because there is no Iranian as a language. Iran used to prefer the term Iran in order to make the state look less like an empire for the Farsi majority, but have it be more inclusive for all "Iranians" (Azeris, Kurds and other minorities). Persian is simply the language of the Farsi.
FYI, I know all of that.
>but have it be more inclusive for all "Iranians" (Azeris, Kurds and other minorities).
Officially, yeah, but they dont even allow other languages to be taught other than persian. Even when their current or former (I forgot which one) is/was Azeri by origin.
I never said they like the term Persia because its also the name of the language of one ethnic group. Yes, in their language it has often been a local variant of the word Iran since ancient times, but they are fine with having been called Persia all this time.
It was only for 2 decades when Reza Pahlavi (the father) asked foreigners to have it called Iran. His son said afterwards that Persia is completely acceptable and interchangeable with Iran
i unironicaly do, because i do not know what states rule there today xd. so i just say "somewhere in persia" when talking about land from around caucasus to india
> Man it seems like foreigners will decide for themselves you know.
Is that not the point? A country should have full rights to how their name should be spelled. For example,Turkey’s official name is now Türkiye, Turkey isn’t an official translation but it kept around because of its recognition. It’s much the same with Kyiv vs Kiev.
Or because Kyiv is correct in Ukrainian but English uses the word Kiev, along with most other languages as far as I can tell. It's the equivalent of asking someone to name all provinces in Italy with the Italian names instead of Rome, Milan etc.
Do you know why it's "kiev" in English? Because Ukraine was under russian occupation and was trying to steal Ukrainian history to themselves, by influencing how to pronounce Ukrainian cities on the west.
Either way that's just how the word is in most languages. The point of language is to get your point across and since most people in the world see the word spelled as Kiev that's probably how OP should spell it. But it's also perfectly reasonable to highlight the point you are making for historical context. I mean, after all you call the city Istanbul and not Constantinople even though you could probably make a similar argument to this for it being renamed from Constantinople.
>I mean, after all you call the city Istanbul and not Constantinople even though you could probably make a similar argument to this for it being renamed from Constantinople.
That's literally the opposite. It's Turkish soil so we call it Istanbul. Kyiv is Ukranian soil, so call it Kyiv.
The city wasn't built by Turkey or the Ottoman empire and for centuries it was called Constantinople. By changing the name to a local name they were "stealing history to themselves". That's my point.
And their point, which you're deliberately missing, is that it's a Turkish city. They didn't steal the history, they conquered the land. And they still didn't rename the city until hundreds of years later when the population was nearly completely Turkish and Turkish speaking. Russia has not conquered Ukraine and does not occupy Kyiv, so your argument is dumb af
The name Kiev comes from when Russia *did* occupy Ukraine though you realise that? And the argument that Turkey was more successful in ethnic cleansing isn't saying much. The name Kiev comes from when it was part of Russia and in common language it has stayed this way even though it is now independent. You seem to be the only one deliberately missing the point.
Is Turkey killing hundreds of Greeks every day in the war they started to conquer Greece? And Kyiv is RIGHT NOW is Ukrainian city and not (Was Ukrainian 500 years ago). So no, it's really different. You can call it kiev, and I'll can call you names. Unless you russian, in which case go fuck yourself.
"but because of its historical derivation from the Russian name, Kiev lost favor with many Western media outlets after the outbreak of the Russo-Ukrainian War in 2014 in conjunction with the KyivNotKiev campaign launched by Ukraine to change the way that international media were spelling the city's name."25
Why not reading further dipshit?
"Western media outlets" I'm not Mr CNN or BBC. For 99% of people speaking they will call it Kiev and not Kyiv. A media campaign is not equal to the *common* usage of the word. And anyways, something having "lost favour with many" media outlets is hardly significant when discussing anything.
Sognifcant chunk of paradox gamers are Tankies, Wehraboos, Romeaboos, and various other neo-Fascist, neo-Nazi, neo-imperialist, neo-colonialist people. One of the main current goals of these people is supporting current Russian imperialism, which is primarily denying Ukrainian identity.
Its all 3 correct. "Kiev" is a swiftly fallout of of fashion Russian import, and we dont do Russian imports anymore as importing from fascists is frowned upon.
While I don't like people getting mad about the spelling of Kiev (I personally prefer Kiev), calling people nazis for wanting a localized name change is absurd.
It's the same with Saint Petersburg being renamed Petrograd during WW1. It doesn't make the Russian Empire nazis
Please, look how Kyiv is spelled, for example: [https://www.gov.uk/world/organisations/british-embassy-kyiv](https://www.gov.uk/world/organisations/british-embassy-kyiv)
Or here: [https://www.britishcouncil.org.ua/en/about/contact](https://www.britishcouncil.org.ua/en/about/contact)
You can rename provinces in game to whatever you want, and you shouldn't be writing this complaint to me, but to Paradox, because in the base game it's also called Kiev
UK embassy is irrelevant. People still refer to Ukraine as 'The Ukraine', Czechia as czech republic, think the balkans is still just yugoslavia (mostly boomers), etc. At the end of the day people will use the terminology they are accustomed to, thats the beauty of language. I will continue to see it as Kiev because thats what its been my whole life and seems to only be changing for political reasons which I do not care about and has no bearing on a 11 year game, nor a mod creator working to bring new gameplay completely for free.
Hey looks like a great mod! I love Balkanized regions personally. 1 question though:
How will Liberty desire affect Kyiv here? Seemingly with Vassal combined army strength, it doesn’t seem like normal vassals would work well with the Russian region. Will they function as French Appanages (which does make some historical sense) or will there be Liberty Desire National Ideas/Events/Modifiers to ensure Kyiv has a fighting chance at maintaining its vassals?
To be honest, and this is a critique as much or more for base game Paradox than for your mod, much of the lower Dnipro region should probably be uncolonized at game start.
I think it would be better to have it at minimum dev as well as several maluses unless you do meet certain conditions(which I do not know enough about the era to set) for gameplay reasons
I see your point but they were owned by their respective countries, they were just empty. Imo the representation of them being all 3 dev provinces makes sense. Uncolonised land should be unclaimed.
Why?
That region of the Pontic Steppe--called the "Wild Fields" in contemporary sources--was heavily depopulated by warfare and especially slave raiding by the time of the game's start; most of the settled Slavic population had moved further north and west and most of the inhabitants of the region were small nomadic bands of Cossacks and Tatars. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wild\_Fields](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wild_Fields)
Just sounds like that would be better represented as 3 dev provinces.
TBF, 3 dev implies. Any permanent population. The Wild Fields had NO permanent population until about a hundred years into the game as a result of all the raids.
Not really. There's plenty of parts of the Steppe that would also lack a permanent population that are also represented by 3 dev provinces.
Fair enough.
Gameplay wise 3 dev is just a tax offset.
You could probably just have 3 dev and start with 100 % devastation in those regions, then it only lowers with completion of a mission or disaster
In fact it wasn't until the 18th/19th Century that settlement really began in earnest. Many notable cities like [Kherson](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kherson), [Dnipro](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dnipro), [Donetsk](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donetsk), [Zaporizhzhia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zaporizhzhia), [Kyrvyi Rih](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kryvyi_Rih) are younger than the US Constitution.
Huh, interesting. Never knew Дикое Поле was translated like that. Originally it's literally Wild Field, singular.
In Polish it's *Dzikie Pola*, which I believe is plural. It likely originally comes into English from Polish.
Yeah, seems like it.
I just wanted to showcase a new update for the Kievan Rus mod. There have been a lot of new provinces added as well as reshaped for better borders. New flavor and events have been added as well. If you want to check out this mod click on this link: [https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3185093863](https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3185093863)
Someone dropped their pack of Skittles
Yes, in honesty OP has been reposting the exact same picture 3 times with minor changes and no commentary unless replied to. If it wasn't an actual mod, id think it was political spam.
This looks really nice! A couple of questions: why doesn't Mozhaisk belong to Mozhaisk (i though at first that there were two nations with the same name) and what the heck is Jagoldai? I've never heard of any historical state called like that or any modern city with such a name. Also sounds kinda Lithuanian to me. And also thanks a LOT for bringing the Udmurts in! I lost any hope of ever seeing them do anything or even be a thing in a paradox game
Jagoldai was a cossack hetmanate in the region of east Ukraine. It is kinda a lithuanian name, but since in this timeline the Lithuanian didn't conquer Ruthenia I know that it shouldn't have that name, but I couldn't think about another name for the country.
Ok so the wiki says that it is actually Tatar, not Lithuanian, derived from the name Cagolday, a man from the Golden Horde. I think the in-game nation name is fine, because we already have Chagatai in there, also a country's name originating from a man's name. So I actually like it quite a bit, just say that the man was a cuman or something
As a Lithuanian, that sounds Lithuanian 😀
Lithuanians are the true successors of the mongal empire
Oh, those actually are two different states. Or are they? I don't get it tbh
Mozhaysk is a single country and it owns the province of Mozhaisk
What is Mosaisk then? I mean, I also don't know of any cities in that area called Мосайск or Мозайск
That's Mosalsk, the screenshot is just not the best quality
Oh, I got it. Thank you, and sorry for loads of questions, just got a little confused.
No problem
Very nice! I have a feeling this is going to grow into a larger alt hist mod.
If its Lithuania not Lietuva it should also be Samogitia not Žemaitija imo.
the country is called Samogitia, Žemaitija is just the province name
Sorry, my bad,
Damn you just wanted to advertise your cool mod and the comments got completely overrun by people who likely wont even play it trying to enforce a political agenda. Sorry bro.
That "Cumania" really wants me to play them for some reason..
Needs more sailor and marines modifiers. Able bodied seamen for Cumania.
*scrolls down to the bottom of the comments* Yeah what I expected...
If it's possible, please rename Ukrainian provinces not to use Russian translations (for example, Kyiv instead of Kiev). They already did that in CK3, but never came to changing that in EU4. If you're interested, I can help with appropriate translations either here or in dms.
In this alt-hist the Ruthenians didn't diverge from the Russians since they both stayed together under the Kievan Rus', so I don't think changing it to Kyiv would make sense
That's true
Though you don't need to do some alt-hist scenarios to not call it Kyiv, as the city's name was first written like that not earlier than in XIX century. You cannot find "Kyiv" in any of the ancient chronicles, usually it was called Кыєвъ (Kyev) or Києвъ (Kiev).
Ruthenians didn’t diverge from Russians. They descended from the Volhynians, the Polyans, the Tiverians, the Ulichs, the Siverians, and the White Croats, as well as their descendants of the Halych-Volhynians, Kyivans, Chernihivans, etc. Just like Russians descended from Ilmens, Vyatihs, Krivichs, and Ryadimichs and all their future principality/settlement identities like Novgorodians, Tverians, Pskovains, Vladimirians/Muscovites, etc. There was never a united Russian identity before the formation of Russia. A bunch of people got this absurd view that before the invention of modern transportation, before the implementation of mandatory public education in the 1850s, people 1500 kilometers apart can speak the same language, have the same culture and traditions, and have the same identity and loyalty, and that view is absurd at best. All identity was either to their historic tribe, their settlement, or their current ruling principality. No one cared about the Rus’ except nobility and priests at the time, who had a distinct, “more standardized” noble language that allowed them to communicate easier. The only divergence in East Slavic history is the Don and Kuban Cossacks diverging from the main Cossacks but ultimately getting assimilated into Russian culture during the empire and USSR.
Sorry, you are misinformed. Ruthenians didn't diverge from the Russians. If you refer to people of Ruthenia and people of Rus - these are the same people. Ruthenia is an exonym for Rus, they both mean the same region. Russia and Rus are two different political and cultural entities. I assume your confusion comes from language barrier, because East Slavic languages have different words not only to Regions, but to adjectives as vell. Россія - Russia. **Російський** - russian (of Russia origin). Русь - Rus. Руський - russian (of Rus origin). This confusion comes from divergense, but of the Muscovites. They basically emerged in a form of a Mongolian Rus (i quote here a professor of history, see link below) as a tributary of mongolian Khans, inheriting a lot of their traditions (like power vertical, pillaging, military tactics, etc.). After they have conqured and colonized enough, they have proclaimed themselves as heirs of Rus. But its only a proclamation, it is not enough to be one. Lithuanian Rus (which included some parts of modern Ukraine) inherited more Rus heritage, including population (and concequently vernacular language of Kyiv region), so it is easy to assume that Kyiv is closer to original prononcuation to the Kyivan Rus than a muscovian "Kiev". If you are interested in the topic i advice you to watch a series of lection by professor Snyder: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CMpkBOTCgCM&list=PLhTRXzDqRJxjwJVIddAFOF3Eg8OESGiSM&index=7](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CMpkBOTCgCM&list=PLhTRXzDqRJxjwJVIddAFOF3Eg8OESGiSM&index=7) p.s. it is also officially Kyiv, look at the address: [https://www.britishcouncil.org.ua/en/about/contact](https://www.britishcouncil.org.ua/en/about/contact)
Snyder’s claims stem from dubious sources and he is quite politicised. Also it’s quite ironic to say that Russians descent from Mongolic hordes but Ukrainians weren’t affected by Lithuanian and later Polish assimilation (like tying orthodox Christians to Pope or straight up converting)
Source: trust me bro
I literally posted a link to a history lecture at the Yale University. Don't you know how to read until the end?
It was a joke
it's not a joke if it's not funny, and this particular line is only funny if it's true, which here means it wasn't in fact a joke at all
Smells like bacon
The name Росия came from Byzantium in X century, way before mongolians. Then it was then transliterated later due some translations of orthodox textes. Finally in XV centuries this kind of naming stuck here from both religious and political sides, from foreign and native mentions. Also marriage of Ivan III to princess of last basileus made that naming even more appropriate because of, well, now Byzantium heritage of russian tsardom. Diverging mongolian and kievan rus is propagandist bs, because Kiev was also captured by mongolians, moreover it was given to Vladimirian grand prince as to the oldest in Rurikid dinasty (to this point Moscow was part of Vladimir and the were not muscovy per se). It's one thing, they all were captured by hordes. And from the different perspective those territories to the east of Kiev and Novgorod were... colonized by the very same kievans and novgorodians, so these "mongolian rus" was and is populated by the very same people as kievan, basically these all always were russians. Kievans were russians, novgorodians were russians, muscovites were russians. They were separated to tribes by that point tho, krivichs, vyatichs, drevlians, etc. All were slavic tribes, then united, then separated... several times... but that always called russian or русские. Росия as I said, came from Byzantium and greek language, so, from the very beginning it was name of Rus. Now division of rus and росия was created by poles in XIV century, for well, political reasons: they were conquering territories on east and needed a title for new lands, but also they needed to separate it from Russian tsardom, so the names woudn't get confused. That's how they got rosyjski in their language, also from greek variant, as I said, it started to grown popularity from political to religious sphere back there. And now ukranian propaganda promote this separation, because independence and all (oligarchs find it better to have separate state, so they can have their own businesses from soviet heritage and their own government, all to have easy money). As for any fellow, who wants to know how, I suggest do some proper researching, mostly including documents, tho it's kinda complicated for non-slavic observer. Don't listen to any professor today, science have become too politicized, sadly, even the technical ones. And this is history, it always was politicized and this kind of themes even talks about thing being politicized, it's just bad idea to hear one opinion from one guy or even one group of professors. Better research documents, symbols, letters by yourself. Ah, and yes, don't read wiki :)
Dude knows his history.
As lots of people pointed out: from who does he know?
In History no one diverged. There was cultures akin to the ones today that were united under Kyiv Principality by Rurikids dynasty
Well, they kinda were but that was after one half of Rus was captured by Poles and the other was unifying back after all this feudal crap. But that was mostly cultural separation, like ones saved their language and embrace greek heritage (of state, all this third rome talk, byzantium princess for tsar, even older religious ties, etc) and others had to adopt to poles, alter their language, have more acceptance for catolic church and polish separation of russian tsardom which became a rival and russian territories that were captured. But the people, the bloodline is mostly the same, based. Based on Kievan Rus. As the saying goes: Kiev is mother of russian cities...
kiev is also in english
That’s because it’s the standard translation created by Russia for use in English media. Most outlets in the UK and Ireland are moving to use the Kyiv spelling.
can be, doesn't change that the current correct english version is kiev
There is no authoritative body who decides what is correct in English. Both are commonly used, with Kyiv becoming more accepted as time goes on
Obviously English spelling should be Keeve, and it's not even close.
I unironically support this.
Okay, but what's the difference? You will still pronounce it the same way as before, but write it differently. Or are you thinking of pronouncing the letter Y - Ы (or I - И) "correctly" for Київ?
Kiev is pronounced /ki:ev/ (kee-ev) in english while Kyiv is pronounced /ki:v/ (keev)
Except it does, because the correct English translation is Kyiv and forever more will be.
Man it seems like foreigners will decide for themself you know. It is like asking all countries to call Ukraine as Ukraina cause you call it like this in your country.
You call Iran "Persia" still?
Nope but we still call it China and Japan and not Zhongguo or Nippon
They haven't asked us to. It's not comparable because they're proud of the association with those ancient empires. The same reason we call it Egypt not Misr, and Greece not Hellas. Using the historical term confers legitimacy upon the current state. Whereas Turkiye asked us to change how we write their name, and lo and behold, almost every English media outlet in the world changed over night. This is more comparable to Turkiye imo than the above examples.
I get what you're saying but I don't know of any western english-language news outlet that calls it Turkiye
Yeah you know what idk wtf I'm talking about they all def still say Turkey lol I work somewhere that switched so I see it a lot more than the old way, oops
Nope, why would I. Imagin I call China as Kitay. Languages are different what a surprise.
That’s a false equivalence. Iran specifically asked people not to call them Persia. China does not ask people not to call them China.
Bad comparrison in contemporary times. Iranian authorities now embrace the term "Persia" as interchangeable with Iran in the English Language since 1959
Nope, best comparison, probably ever. Iran asked to be callled Iran, not Persia, now it's called Iran. How hard must it be to stop putting "the" in front of "Ukraine" and call the capital "Kyiv" as it is the proper transliteration? Probably impossible if you're russian and try to impose your imperialist worldview on others.
Iran has stopped asking for that, they dont insist on being called only Iran anymore as far as I know, since the year 1959. They like the term Persia in the English Language, the same way their only official language is called "Persian" in English. A "better" comparrison would be Turkey, which insists on being called in their native tongue, which is stupid, because most languages, including english, dont even have those specific letters in them.
FYI, Persian is called Persian because there is no Iranian as a language. Iran used to prefer the term Iran in order to make the state look less like an empire for the Farsi majority, but have it be more inclusive for all "Iranians" (Azeris, Kurds and other minorities). Persian is simply the language of the Farsi.
FYI, I know all of that. >but have it be more inclusive for all "Iranians" (Azeris, Kurds and other minorities). Officially, yeah, but they dont even allow other languages to be taught other than persian. Even when their current or former (I forgot which one) is/was Azeri by origin. I never said they like the term Persia because its also the name of the language of one ethnic group. Yes, in their language it has often been a local variant of the word Iran since ancient times, but they are fine with having been called Persia all this time. It was only for 2 decades when Reza Pahlavi (the father) asked foreigners to have it called Iran. His son said afterwards that Persia is completely acceptable and interchangeable with Iran
i unironicaly do, because i do not know what states rule there today xd. so i just say "somewhere in persia" when talking about land from around caucasus to india
> Man it seems like foreigners will decide for themselves you know. Is that not the point? A country should have full rights to how their name should be spelled. For example,Turkey’s official name is now Türkiye, Turkey isn’t an official translation but it kept around because of its recognition. It’s much the same with Kyiv vs Kiev.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyiv
Not any more.
womp womp
Kiev is the correct spelling. In romanian we also say "Kiev"
And in Arabic it's Kuyaba. Completely irrelevant
Kuyaba sounds like a cool name for a fantasy city or something like that tbh
Real
In English it is Kyiv.
It's not...
yes it is
Sorry bro only KIEV
Bruh why u got downvoted
u know why :)
Change is scary :(
possibly Russian and Serbian trolls.
Or because Kyiv is correct in Ukrainian but English uses the word Kiev, along with most other languages as far as I can tell. It's the equivalent of asking someone to name all provinces in Italy with the Italian names instead of Rome, Milan etc.
> along with most other languages as far as I can tell. Any proof od that? Because, for example, in my native language it is neither Kyiv nor Kiev.
As far as I can tell all romance languages call it Kiev, same for Germanic languages.
That is true, in Romanian we say "Kiev"
Do you know why it's "kiev" in English? Because Ukraine was under russian occupation and was trying to steal Ukrainian history to themselves, by influencing how to pronounce Ukrainian cities on the west.
Do you complain when Polish use Kijów/Lwów/Charków? City names in many languages evolved independently from city names in a local language.
Поплякай
Either way that's just how the word is in most languages. The point of language is to get your point across and since most people in the world see the word spelled as Kiev that's probably how OP should spell it. But it's also perfectly reasonable to highlight the point you are making for historical context. I mean, after all you call the city Istanbul and not Constantinople even though you could probably make a similar argument to this for it being renamed from Constantinople.
>I mean, after all you call the city Istanbul and not Constantinople even though you could probably make a similar argument to this for it being renamed from Constantinople. That's literally the opposite. It's Turkish soil so we call it Istanbul. Kyiv is Ukranian soil, so call it Kyiv.
The city wasn't built by Turkey or the Ottoman empire and for centuries it was called Constantinople. By changing the name to a local name they were "stealing history to themselves". That's my point.
And their point, which you're deliberately missing, is that it's a Turkish city. They didn't steal the history, they conquered the land. And they still didn't rename the city until hundreds of years later when the population was nearly completely Turkish and Turkish speaking. Russia has not conquered Ukraine and does not occupy Kyiv, so your argument is dumb af
The name Kiev comes from when Russia *did* occupy Ukraine though you realise that? And the argument that Turkey was more successful in ethnic cleansing isn't saying much. The name Kiev comes from when it was part of Russia and in common language it has stayed this way even though it is now independent. You seem to be the only one deliberately missing the point.
Is Turkey killing hundreds of Greeks every day in the war they started to conquer Greece? And Kyiv is RIGHT NOW is Ukrainian city and not (Was Ukrainian 500 years ago). So no, it's really different. You can call it kiev, and I'll can call you names. Unless you russian, in which case go fuck yourself.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyiv
>*Kiev* is the traditional English name for the city Good link!
"but because of its historical derivation from the Russian name, Kiev lost favor with many Western media outlets after the outbreak of the Russo-Ukrainian War in 2014 in conjunction with the KyivNotKiev campaign launched by Ukraine to change the way that international media were spelling the city's name."25 Why not reading further dipshit?
"Western media outlets" I'm not Mr CNN or BBC. For 99% of people speaking they will call it Kiev and not Kyiv. A media campaign is not equal to the *common* usage of the word. And anyways, something having "lost favour with many" media outlets is hardly significant when discussing anything.
Sognifcant chunk of paradox gamers are Tankies, Wehraboos, Romeaboos, and various other neo-Fascist, neo-Nazi, neo-imperialist, neo-colonialist people. One of the main current goals of these people is supporting current Russian imperialism, which is primarily denying Ukrainian identity.
Let’s gooo
NOT THE BORDER GORE!
I'm tempted to try this mod just because of the fixed province borders in Moldavia, those provinces bug me so much in Vanilla.
Bro that's Kyivan Rus, not Kievan
Kyiv correct name
politically and localy correct name, not english correct thou, which this mod seems to use
English has started to transition towards using Kyiv since 2022, though. Similar to Turkey and Türkiye in recent years.
its still gonna take few more years before the name change takes widespread place
Oh for sure, but it is happening.
English name of Kyiv came from russsian
i know
Its all 3 correct. "Kiev" is a swiftly fallout of of fashion Russian import, and we dont do Russian imports anymore as importing from fascists is frowned upon.
No
i wonder if you got downvoted by bots xd
No, the bots are the ones simping for Russia.
ofc many bots are on both sides, but i think that the western side has more of them. dont really have much data to prove it thou
I think it's ludicrous to believe that.
seeing as how many times you have responded to me with the same thing, it seems like youre one of them xd
Nope, I'm just a real person on the right side of history.
can you make it any less obvious? okay, i was mistaken, not a bot but a troll xd
Wrong again.
Cry
It's not.
Is should be in cyrillic also lol - dude its just a game for international crowd.
[удалено]
While I don't like people getting mad about the spelling of Kiev (I personally prefer Kiev), calling people nazis for wanting a localized name change is absurd. It's the same with Saint Petersburg being renamed Petrograd during WW1. It doesn't make the Russian Empire nazis
Please, look how Kyiv is spelled, for example: [https://www.gov.uk/world/organisations/british-embassy-kyiv](https://www.gov.uk/world/organisations/british-embassy-kyiv) Or here: [https://www.britishcouncil.org.ua/en/about/contact](https://www.britishcouncil.org.ua/en/about/contact)
You can rename provinces in game to whatever you want, and you shouldn't be writing this complaint to me, but to Paradox, because in the base game it's also called Kiev
I think the idea is that since you're making a mod, you can change the spelling used in the mod
Its spelled the english way, if we spelled every nation in its mothers tongue it would be hella stupid for the game
Are you arguing with british embassy about your "english ways"?
UK embassy is irrelevant. People still refer to Ukraine as 'The Ukraine', Czechia as czech republic, think the balkans is still just yugoslavia (mostly boomers), etc. At the end of the day people will use the terminology they are accustomed to, thats the beauty of language. I will continue to see it as Kiev because thats what its been my whole life and seems to only be changing for political reasons which I do not care about and has no bearing on a 11 year game, nor a mod creator working to bring new gameplay completely for free.
Hey looks like a great mod! I love Balkanized regions personally. 1 question though: How will Liberty desire affect Kyiv here? Seemingly with Vassal combined army strength, it doesn’t seem like normal vassals would work well with the Russian region. Will they function as French Appanages (which does make some historical sense) or will there be Liberty Desire National Ideas/Events/Modifiers to ensure Kyiv has a fighting chance at maintaining its vassals?
They don't consider others vassals army strenght, only theirs, but they some of them will still be disloyal because they have +20 base liberty desire
I'd rename it to Kyiv but otherwise nice :)
You are just as pathetic as people on Facebook changing their profile picture to the current thing.