Fixes and improvements of a hidden faction

[tmina32]

Hello, I really like the mod and how much historically detailed and correct it is.
I do, however, have some suggestions regarding Croatia, due to the unavoidalby odd position the Kingdom is in because of the engine limitations.
So lets see what we have here.


1. "Croatian jobbagy" units
These units should atleast get a rename, since "jobbagy" is a Hungarian word and means nothing in Croatian.
I would suggest something like "pješadinac" (infantryman) or "ratnik" (warrior), or whatever the equivalent is called in the Bosnian or Serbian troop tree.

2. Živogošće?
Are there even any records that this place existed at the time? I couldn't find any, and compared to other villages like Gradec, Sisak or Nin, this one is pretty insignificant. I would much rather suggest that Ostrog (near today's Zaostrog), then a fortified port-village, be put in its place.
I'm not really sure about the population there being Serbian and Orthodox either, since Ston was an old diocese, and the Orthodox episcopus appointed there during Serbian rule (after 1200.) only remained for a couple of decades. But if that's something researchers have found, it's fine.

3. New Croatian castles and villages?
There are some emptier parts of the map, where new settlemens could be placed.
For instance, the town of Vukovo Vlkovo (today Vukovar) could be a castle, with it's village being Ilok.
The other big hole in the map is between Kaptol and Senj, which could be filled with the castle Modruš and the village of Slunj. They were ruled by the Krčki Lords, and Lord Bartol II. Krčki ruled it at the time. There is a "Lord Bartol Krčki" already in game, but is the lord of Senj. Senj was ruled by the Knights Templar in 1200., but if they are not going to be created, Senj could then go to a new lord Vid Krčki, Bartol's brother.

4. Croatian culture / Noble troop tree
This seems to be the big one. As far as I understand, there can't be 2 cultures and 2 noble troop trees in one faction.
If that is true, than the way to implement it must be through the Republic of Ragusa. Yes, it is a small faction, and it having merceneries instead of armed peasents as lowly troops is realistic. But it's noble troop tree is nonexistant, and when you click on "recruit nobles" in it's castles you just get Ragusan mercenaries as if you recruited them in a mercenary camp.
But even then you will still be recruiting "Young Hungarian nobles" in all castles held by Croatian nobles, which is weird.
The only way would then be to create a Croatian "subordinate faction", like some Spanish Orders were implemented. It could be a decent way to simulate a personal union ingame.

5. Relations of Croatian lords
The relations of Croatian lords could be improved between themselves, and their realtion with Hungarian nobles and the King could be decreased, to simulate the political rivalry and the cultural gap that existed.

6. Vira?
I couldn't find any historical data of settlement with this name on the island of Hvar. Same case as Živogošće. The village of the Hvar castle should be Stari grad, or Paiz, as it was called. It was the seat of the Hvar bishopric, and is the only old settlement on the island of Hvar besides the city of Hvar itself. Therefore, "Vira" should just be renamed to Paiz.

7. Mongoloid / Khergit "Croatian peasants"
I think I saw some of these. Anyway, this speaks for itself.


8. The Croatian faction project

WHY:

There are several reasons why I think this can be good thing. I already metioned the noble troop tree problem above.
The other reasons consist of the same reasons why the Banate of Bosnia was added as a faction, although being a vassal state of the King of Hungary.  Culturally, it was completely different from the rest of the realm. Furthermore, as the only legal "kingdom" besides the Kingdom of Hungary itself, it carried a moderate amount of political and diplomatic weight, atleast in the power hierarchy of the Hungarian royal family. It's ruler was András, brother of king Imre and vicarius regis, a king's regent in Croatia. He became king himself in the coming years. Kingdom of Croatia, being politically separated from the rest of the realm as well, had András as a central ruling figure, where he ruled mostly independently. Hence, he is a very important argument for a separate faction.
With a ruler, lords, territory, cultural and political specialty, and a degree of independence, the pretext for this faction exists.

HOW:

The idea I had is that it could be implemented as a "subordinate faction" of the Kingdom of Hungary. On the wiki it says that the, for example, that the Order of Santiago is subordinate to the Kingom of Leon and that it will declare war on the factions at war with the Kingom of Leon. I have not yet tested if this works, but if it does, the same could be done for Croatia.
Implementing Croatia as a faction, but clearly subjecting it to Hungarian rule, both indirectly (faction ruler will be Hungarian) and , if possible, directly (making it the "subordinate faction" of the Kingdom of Hungary), is the way do it.

The faction would, therefore, be ruled by the Hungarian prince András, brother of the Hungarian King Imre. He is already present in-game with the title of "Duke of Croatia", and is the lord of Zadar (which is historically correct).
The faction could, however, also include Slavonia (marked on the map below), since András was both dux Dalmatiae et Croatiae (Duke of Croatia and Dalmatia) and dux totius Sclavoniae (Duke of Slavonia). That way almost all the in-game areas where you recruit Croatian units and where Croatian lords are present would be incorporated into the faction.

Now, here is a Hungarian map defining it's borders at the end of the 12th century, during the reign of  Bela III. ("Kingdom of Croatia and Dalmatia" is in light green):
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/fb/Hungary%2C_Croatia%2C_Bosnia_and_Galicia_in_the_12th_century.jpg

With the possible creation of this faction, some historical political centers within it's borders should be introduced, such as Modruš and Slunj I suggested earlier, and the Bišće (or Bihać) with the village of Krupa, ruled by the Babonić lords.
Likewise, Split could perhaps be elevated to the city status, as it was the seat of an archbishopric.
Hvar would also be added to this faction, as Hvar was, at the time, part of the Kingdom of Croatia/Dalmatia.



I will continue to update and improve this post.

 

[NikeBG]

Thanks for the suggestions, but since the current Great Maker of the mod has been missing for quite some time now and refuses to reappear, the future of the mod itself is quite uncertain and it's doubtful your suggestions could be implemented (at least in this state of the mod).

 

[tmina32]

Thanks for the suggestions, but since the current Great Maker of the mod has been missing for quite some time now and refuses to reappear, the future of the mod itself is quite uncertain and it's doubtful your suggestions could be implemented (at least in this state of the mod).

Yup, I've read the email he sent you 8 months ago...
It isn't looking very good, but if that final update does happen, maybe these suggestions could find their way in.

 

[tmina32]

*Updated, certain paragraphs improved

 

[SBolshevik]

Well, this really is quite interesting! It would also go really well with a possible questline to simulate the civil war between Emeric and Andrew. Also, regarding Vukovo, considering that we are in 1200 here, it's likely that the name was Vlkovo, considering the L had not yes vocalized at this point in time.

 

[tmina32]

Well, this really is quite interesting! It would also go really well with a possible questline to simulate the civil war between Emeric and Andrew. Also, regarding Vukovo, considering that we are in 1200 here, it's likely that the name was Vlkovo, considering the L had not yes vocalized at this point in time.

Thanks for the support! The idea about the civil war questline or something similar did cross my mind, but I thought that the things I've suggested were already ambitious enough. 
About Vukovo, I think you are right.




I'd like to have a mod maker's (or renovator?  ) opinion on point 8, so I can start researching the names and equipment for the Croatian noble and professional troop tree, if he agrees.

 

[Drevnibor]

Hullo, Tmina!

I have just recently made an account here, since this mod seems to be revived.
However, I'm a long-time lurker on this forum, and have paid a close attention, especially during the development of the Balkan factions, several years ago.
So, I will try to answer your questions.

1. "Croatian jobbagy" units
These units should atleast get a rename, since "jobbagy" is a Hungarian word and means nothing in Croatian.

I agree, renaming Jobbagy would make sense - I'm surprised it wasn't done before.

2. Živogošće?
Are there even any records that this place existed at the time? I couldn't find any, and compared to other villages like Gradec, Sisak or Nin, this one is pretty insignificant. I would much rather suggest that Ostrog (near today's Zaostrog), then a fortified port-village, be put in its place.

Živogošće is a settlement which I've often seen in maps representing Serbia in 1190-1220.
Here are two maps, and Živogošće (Живогошће) is on both of them, in the western part.

Spoiler

I'm not really sure about the population there being Serbian and Orthodox either, since Ston was an old diocese, and the Orthodox episcopus appointed there during Serbian rule (after 1200.) only remained for a couple of decades. But if that's something researchers have found, it's fine.

If my memory serves me right, the whole Serbian seaside was to have Catholic settlements, according to its Serbian researchers.
Maybe Živogošće was accidentally omitted, or maybe the developers were waiting for religion to actually be a part of gameplay, and not only a cosmetic feature.

As for the population of Živogošće, no one can claim with certainty what national majority did the settlement had.
However, I doubt that (as you yourself noted) a seat of Orthodox bishopry would be made in that area, if there weren't a lot of Serbs there.
Also, I remember reading a book History of Dubrovnik, by a Croatian historian Vinko Foretić.
He says that the population of Dubrovnik was around 50-50 (Serbs and Croats), up until the 14th century.
And although I don't personally agree with the latter part of that statement, the fact is that both sides agree there was a hefty number of Serbs in that whole area, in 1200.

Senj was ruled by the Knights Templar in 1200

Oh... that's interesting!

4. Croatian culture / Noble troop tree
This seems to be the big one. As far as I understand, there can't be 2 cultures and 2 noble troop trees in one faction.
If that is true, than the way to implement it must be through the Republic of Ragusa. Yes, it is a small faction, and it having merceneries instead of armed peasents as lowly troops is realistic. But it's noble troop tree is nonexistant, and when you click on "recruit nobles" in it's castles you just get Ragusan mercenaries as if you recruited them in a mercenary camp.

If I remember correctly, the research thread for Ragusa and Bosnia was made by a Serbian guy, but the research was open-for-all, so I remember there were some Croats and Bosnians doing research too.
Now, I believe some sort of a neutral agreement was made, where Ragusa (i.e. Dubrovnik) will have town troops called Dalmatian Militia, and their combat troops called Mercenaries, with no mention of Serbia or Croatia.
I think that's fair, since these boards tended to quickly escalate in political arguing.

But even then you will still be recruiting "Young Hungarian nobles" in all castles held by Croatian nobles, which is weird.

No, no, no... try not to look at Hungarian Nobles as belonging to the Hungarian people, or Bulgarian Nobles being strictly Bulgarian by birth.
For example, let's say France attacks an English castle, and conquer it.
The village of that castle will still produce ENGLISH villagers, but the castle will produce FRENCH nobles, since they are now waging war for France.
After all, Holy Roman empire has the Imperial Nobles, with no mention of their 'nationality'.

The only way would then be to create a Croatian "subordinate faction", like some Spanish Orders were implemented. It could be a decent way to simulate a personal union ingame.

I really like that suggestion.

5. Relations of Croatian lords
The relations of Croatian lords could be improved between themselves, and their realtion with Hungarian nobles and the King could be decreased, to simulate the political rivalry and the cultural gap that existed.

I remember someone once asking if that is possible, or the relation numbers are randomly distributed.
However, I wasn't there to see an answer.

6. Vira?
I couldn't find any historical data of settlement with this name on the island of Hvar. Same case as Živogošće. The village of the Hvar castle should be Stari grad, or Paiz, as it was called. It was the seat of the Hvar bishopric, and is the only old settlement on the island of Hvar besides the city of Hvar itself. Therefore, "Vira" should just be renamed to Paiz.

If I remember correctly, Vira was just a temporary name, which would be replaced when a historical name is found.
However, it seems most people forgot about it.
I think there is Vira in real-life modern Hvar.

7. Mongoloid / Khergit "Croatian peasants"
I think I saw some of these. Anyway, this speaks for itself.

Their facial appearance, or their clothes?

8. The Croatian faction project

Look, if we are strictly going by history, I would avoid putting Croatia as a faction, not because I'm a Serb, but because it's a case of one side against everyone else.
Meaning - the Croats, in their history books, call their land CROATO-HUNGARIAN KINGDOM.
On the other hand, the Hungarians and the rest of the world simply call it HUNGARIAN KINGDOM, with Croatia being nothing more than a region in said kingdom.

However...

I remember when, some years ago, a controversy arose concerning the addition of an Albanian faction, called Arber/Arbanon, in Europe 1200.
The Albanian side claimed that region (town of Kruje and its surroundings) had a certain level of autonomy from the Byzantine (Roman) Empire.
The opposing side claimed that the evidence confirming the existence of a ''state'' of Arber was filmsy - it relied on one WIkipedia article, with some very strange (dubious?) sources from modern books.
However, Arber was added.

So, if we look at the fact that Arber/Arbanon was added despite the strong opposition, I see no harm in making Croatia as well, since their existance certainly has more evidence and strength, than that of Arbanon.

Anyway, so yes, I would, if I were you, propose that Crots the Knightly Order treatment.atment.

 

[NikeBG]

The Order "vassalage" system is indeed a good idea, but first we (Korinov or Antonis, actually) would have to deal with some of the issues of that system, f.e. there was a problem when the "master-faction" signed peace with its enemy, but the "vassal-faction" didn't and was thus soon wiped out by the enemy superior forces.

 

[Black_Scythe]

I remember when, some years ago, a controversy arose concerning the addition of an Albanian faction, called Arber/Arbanon, in Europe 1200.
The Albanian side claimed that region (town of Kruje and its surroundings) had a certain level of autonomy from the Byzantine (Roman) Empire.
The opposing side claimed that the evidence confirming the existence of a ''state'' of Arber was filmsy - it relied on one WIkipedia article, with some very strange (dubious?) sources from modern books.
However, Arber was added.

So, if we look at the fact that Arber/Arbanon was added despite the strong opposition, I see no harm in making Croatia as well, since their existance certainly has more evidence and strength, than that of Arbanon.

Hello Drevnibor,
your nickname makes me assume that you're an ex-yugo, and as such your knowledge of albanian history is indubitably a little tainted. Arbanon, all the while keeping very strong ties with the Byzantine Empire, was a independent entity, and it's existence isn't doubted anywhere else apart from this board . It had it's separate "foreign policy" attested by it's treaties with Ragusa and Serbia, and that's what basically constituted a 'state' back then. As far as dubious/strange sources, please enlighten me by pointing at them, since I know history students who are very active in Wiki, and would like to notify them if that article has wrong sources.

 

[Drevnibor]

your nickname makes me assume that you're an ex-yugo

You are correct in your assumption.

and it's existence isn't doubted anywhere else apart from this board

Okay!

As far as dubious/strange sources, please enlighten me by pointing at them, since I know history students who are very active in Wiki, and would like to notify them if that article has wrong sources.

Don't know, don't remember, don't care.
It was my crude way of telling that I'm FOR adding as much mini-factions as possible - independence/autonomy be damned!
I still think it's a good idea to have some factions having Knightly Order game mechanics.

 

[Black_Scythe]

I still think it's a good idea to have some factions having Knightly Order game mechanics.

There's a quest that allows for the Order of St. George to be created. Maybe such a thing could be done for Croatia as well?

 

[SBolshevik]

I still think it's a good idea to have some factions having Knightly Order game mechanics.

There's a quest that allows for the Order of St. George to be created. Maybe such a thing could be done for Croatia as well?

It exists at the start, though, it wouldn't make much sense.

 

[tmina32]

Hullo, Tmina!

I have just recently made an account here, since this mod seems to be revived.
However, I'm a long-time lurker on this forum, and have paid a close attention, especially during the development of the Balkan factions, several years ago.
So, I will try to answer your questions.

Hi!
Thanks for trying to clear some things up.

2. Živogošće?
Are there even any records that this place existed at the time? I couldn't find any, and compared to other villages like Gradec, Sisak or Nin, this one is pretty insignificant. I would much rather suggest that Ostrog (near today's Zaostrog), then a fortified port-village, be put in its place.

Živogošće is a settlement which I've often seen in maps representing Serbia in 1190-1220.
Here are two maps, and Živogošće (Живогошће) is on both of them, in the western part.

Okay, but is there anything else than those maps? I mean, is there any, any at all, historical data on that settlement?
Maybe it just serves as a reference to the stretch of the Serbian rule in today's geography.

Also, I remember reading a book History of Dubrovnik, by a Croatian historian Vinko Foretić.
He says that the population of Dubrovnik was around 50-50 (Serbs and Croats), up until the 14th century.

I've been skimming through the book, and the statement which sounds like yours is in the prologue, although a more correct translation is as follows: "Both Croats and Serbs have been settling in Dubrovnik, but the Croatian element outweighed, and from the 14. century we can say that Dubrovnik was a Croatian city." I do apologise if you meant something else.
However, Foretić also quotes the Arabian writer Al Idrisi who, in his work from 1153., says that Dubrovnik and some islands were a part of Croatia, although the actually - weren't. They can't be. Foretić then says: "It is, therefore, obvious, that Al Idrisi observes "Croatia" as an ethnical area inhabited by Croats."
So there, I just used your source, nothing else.

And although I don't personally agree with the latter part of that statement, the fact is that both sides agree there was a hefty number of Serbs in that whole area, in 1200.

Okay, that's correct.

4. Croatian culture / Noble troop tree
This seems to be the big one. As far as I understand, there can't be 2 cultures and 2 noble troop trees in one faction.
If that is true, than the way to implement it must be through the Republic of Ragusa. Yes, it is a small faction, and it having merceneries instead of armed peasents as lowly troops is realistic. But it's noble troop tree is nonexistant, and when you click on "recruit nobles" in it's castles you just get Ragusan mercenaries as if you recruited them in a mercenary camp.

If I remember correctly, the research thread for Ragusa and Bosnia was made by a Serbian guy, but the research was open-for-all, so I remember there were some Croats and Bosnians doing research too.
Now, I believe some sort of a neutral agreement was made, where Ragusa (i.e. Dubrovnik) will have town troops called Dalmatian Militia, and their combat troops called Mercenaries, with no mention of Serbia or Croatia.
I think that's fair, since these boards tended to quickly escalate in political arguing.

That's probably the most realistic solution anyway. You can easily imagine a small Byzantine fortified port-town like Dubrovnik, completely surrounded by hostile states, hiring merecenaries rather than raising levy, which they surely didn't have a lot of.
The minor problem that still remains that in the Korčula castle you apperantly get the same unit (ragusan mercenery) no matter do you select sargeant or noble troops.

But even then you will still be recruiting "Young Hungarian nobles" in all castles held by Croatian nobles, which is weird.

No, no, no... try not to look at Hungarian Nobles as belonging to the Hungarian people, or Bulgarian Nobles being strictly Bulgarian by birth.
For example, let's say France attacks an English castle, and conquer it.
The village of that castle will still produce ENGLISH villagers, but the castle will produce FRENCH nobles, since they are now waging war for France.
After all, Holy Roman empire has the Imperial Nobles, with no mention of their 'nationality'.

It's hard not to, there is even a Bosnian noble troop tree, and no Croatian one. 
Exactly because of that did I went on so much about the status of Croatia in the union with Hungary in the first post.

Senj was ruled by the Knights Templar in 1200

Oh... that's interesting!

Yeah. And when Andras (Andrew) II. went on a Crusade, he appointed a Templar Master Pontius de Cruce as his regent in the Kingdom of Croatia and Dalmatia.
Check your messages, I will send you a link to an interesting text (on Croatian) about Templars in Croatia, if you want read up on it.

6. Vira?
I couldn't find any historical data of settlement with this name on the island of Hvar. Same case as Živogošće. The village of the Hvar castle should be Stari grad, or Paiz, as it was called. It was the seat of the Hvar bishopric, and is the only old settlement on the island of Hvar besides the city of Hvar itself. Therefore, "Vira" should just be renamed to Paiz.

If I remember correctly, Vira was just a temporary name, which would be replaced when a historical name is found.
However, it seems most people forgot about it.
I think there is Vira in real-life modern Hvar.

By quick googleing, you find it's the name of a car camp located on Hvar. Maybe the researcher has some fond memories of the place? 
Anyway, I doubt it ever was a place of importance.

7. Mongoloid / Khergit "Croatian peasants"
I think I saw some of these. Anyway, this speaks for itself.

Their facial appearance, or their clothes?

Both, I'm afarid. Also, I don't think Croatian units shouldn't have sabres. The Byzantine influence should be more represented, since it currently isn't at all, except in Dubrovnik.

8. The Croatian faction project

Look, if we are strictly going by history, I would avoid putting Croatia as a faction, not because I'm a Serb, but because it's a case of one side against everyone else.
Meaning - the Croats, in their history books, call their land CROATO-HUNGARIAN KINGDOM.
On the other hand, the Hungarians and the rest of the world simply call it HUNGARIAN KINGDOM, with Croatia being nothing more than a region in said kingdom.

I put up a Hungarian map where it clearly says that they called their realm "The Hungarian Empire".
Croatia is clearly separated and reffered to as "Kingdom", and so is Bosnia.
Now, of course the most common name of the said realm is the "Hungarian Kingdom", since empire is a bit too much and the dynasty was Hungarian, who were, of course, dominant.
Likewise, "Croatia in the union with Hungary" is a term used to desrcibe a state, something which Croatia (as in explained in te first post) had all attributes of.
I do not quite get what you wanted to say here.

I remember when, some years ago, a controversy arose concerning the addition of an Albanian faction, called Arber/Arbanon, in Europe 1200.
The Albanian side claimed that region (town of Kruje and its surroundings) had a certain level of autonomy from the Byzantine (Roman) Empire.
The opposing side claimed that the evidence confirming the existence of a ''state'' of Arber was filmsy - it relied on one WIkipedia article, with some very strange (dubious?) sources from modern books.
However, Arber was added.

So, if we look at the fact that Arber/Arbanon was added despite the strong opposition, I see no harm in making Croatia as well, since their existance certainly has more evidence and strength, than that of Arbanon.

I know nothing about Albania, but Bosnia was added, which is in a very similar position as Croatia.
Legally, Croatia was in a better position, but Bosnia had a de facto independent ruler of their own ethnicity.

In the end, it's not up to you or me to decide anyways.
Nemo iudex in re sua.
In other words, I'm biased by default, so I can't judge on this matter.

 

[Drevnibor]

Okay, but is there anything else than those maps? I mean, is there any, any at all, historical data on that settlement? Maybe it just serves as a reference to the stretch of the Serbian rule in today's geography.

Dunno, really.
I have a fair share of historical books, but, to be honest, I'm not really interested in searching them whole, only for a (possible) mention of Živogošće.

Now, I don't know why Živogošće itself was chosen, but maybe it was added to the mod not because of Serbian historical stretch, but because of gameplay stretch.
I had my own (private-use only) mod, back in the days of regular, non-Warband Mount & Blade.
It centered on the late XIV century Balkans.
Now, when I was distributing settlements, I would sometimes choose a lesser known place, because it was better suited to fill in the map, since I think no player likes empty patches of world map.

I've been skimming through the book, and the statement which sounds like yours is in the prologue, although a more correct translation is as follows: "Both Croats and Serbs have been settling in Dubrovnik, but the Croatian element outweighed, and from the 14. century we can say that Dubrovnik was a Croatian city." I do apologise if you meant something else.

Ah, yes - bravo!
That's the proper quote.
I would really be interested to know how Foretić came to that conclusion, since Ragusans mostly tended to their own matters, without giving much damn about anyone's nationality.
It is possible, however, that there were various 'national currents' emerging, in different time periods (Italian, Croatian, Serbian, or neutral).
For example, in the late 19th century, a pro-Serbian current actually became ruling in Dubrovnik, and according to their census, around 90% Ragusans declared themselves as Serbian language-speaking Catholics.
However, it seems Serbia proper wasn't really interested in Catholic Serbs.

However, Foretić also quotes the Arabian writer Al Idrisi who, in his work from 1153., says that Dubrovnik and some islands were a part of Croatia, although the actually - weren't. They can't be. Foretić then says: "It is, therefore, obvious, that Al Idrisi observes "Croatia" as an ethnical area inhabited by Croats."
So there, I just used your source, nothing else.

It is very difficult to know what the foreign writers had in mind, when writing of their 'tours' of various lands.
For example, the Byzantine/Roman Empire almost never actually referred to Serbs as SERBS, during the entirety of Middle Ages!

In their early documents, they called us DALMATIANS, and in the latter years, up until the fall of the Empire, they called us TRIBALIANS.
Hungarians, on the other hand, called us RACOK (Rascias), from XV to XVIII century.

The minor problem that still remains that in the Korčula castle you apperantly get the same unit (ragusan mercenery) no matter do you select sargeant or noble troops.

From my quick memory, I seem to remember that Korčula was mostly independent, but was 'allied' with Dubrovnik, in the latter half of the XII century.

By quick googleing, you find it's the name of a car camp located on Hvar. Maybe the researcher has some fond memories of the place? 

Haha, that's great!
In Europe 1200, it must be a horse-camp. 

Both, I'm afarid.
Also, I don't think Croatian units shouldn't have sabres. The Byzantine influence should be more represented, since it currently isn't at all, except in Dubrovnik.

When I was making my own mod, I never found a solution to the randomness of soldier's faces.
There would be black Serbs, blonde Hungarians, and Mongoloid Greeks.
However, it might be an easy thing to do - I just don't know about it.

As for the sabres, haven't the Hungarians used them at the time?
If so, it isn't a stretch to think Croats used them as well.

I do not quite get what you wanted to say here.

Nothing offensive.
I was just saying that Croats put more emphasis on Croato-Hungarian Kingdom, while the Hungarians and Westerners mostly call it only Hungarian Kingdom.
Changing that must be deeply researched, in order to avoid any flame wars, although I already said that I'm not against adding Croatia with knightly order mechanics.

I know nothing about Albania, but Bosnia was added, which is in a very similar position as Croatia.
Legally, Croatia was in a better position

The difference between the statuses of Croatia and Bosnia was the fact that Croatia was a 'faithful' part of the Kingdom, while Bosnia was making promise after promise to Hungary, often without the intention of keeping said agreements.
It seems Hungary never completely subdued Bosnia, due to Bosnia's geography/topography.

Bosnia had a de facto independent ruler of their own ethnicity.

I think the advantage of this mod is the fact that it has CULTURES, rather than nationalities.
One 'nation' can have many cultures.

In the end, it's not up to you or me to decide anyways.
Nemo iudex in re sua.
In other words, I'm biased by default, so I can't judge on this matter.

I wouldn't disprove your opinion - after all, aren't we all biased to pretty much every element in real life?

 

[tmina32]

Dunno, really.
I have a fair share of historical books, but, to be honest, I'm not really interested in searching them whole, only for a (possible) mention of Živogošće.

Now, I don't know why Živogošće itself was chosen, but maybe it was added to the mod not because of Serbian historical stretch, but because of gameplay stretch.
I had my own (private-use only) mod, back in the days of regular, non-Warband Mount & Blade.
It centered on the late XIV century Balkans.
Now, when I was distributing settlements, I would sometimes choose a lesser known place, because it was better suited to fill in the map, since I think no player likes empty patches of world map.

I meant on the map you provided. And Ostrog (today Zaostrog) was very close anyways, the village could just be renamed.

I would really be interested to know how Foretić came to that conclusion, since Ragusans mostly tended to their own matters, without giving much damn about anyone's nationality.

Local patriotism was very strong it that area, yes.
I think he used the same methods by which you know that, as you wrote lower down, Tribalians and Rascians were Serbs.

It is possible, however, that there were various 'national currents' emerging, in different time periods (Italian, Croatian, Serbian, or neutral).

Italian Dubrovnik? 
Haven't heard of that before.
'National currents' started in 19th century. Before that, people weren't so "nationally aware".

For example, in the late 19th century, a pro-Serbian current actually became ruling in Dubrovnik, and according to their census, around 90% Ragusans declared themselves as Serbian language-speaking Catholics.
However, it seems Serbia proper wasn't really interested in Catholic Serbs.

The pro-Serbian current made a pro-Serbian census. 
They went by the Karadžić's "Serbs - everyone and everywhere" concept, where the Shtokavian dialect was declared Serbian-only.
Fortunately, it didn't "stick".
In any case, this is from the late 19th century, a period so distant from the year 1200. we might as well look at today's census - all Ragusans declare themselves Croatian-speaking Croats. 

It is very difficult to know what the foreign writers had in mind, when writing of their 'tours' of various lands.

Well, he gave Dubrovnik the same attribute as other, "non-disputed" areas, - Croatian. I think it's very clear what he meant.
Now, how reliable it is, nobody can ever know.
Sadly, there isn't an abundance of sources about this.

In their early documents, they called us DALMATIANS

Serbs were called Dalmatians? Wasn't "Dalmatians" the name for old Romans at the time?

From my quick memory, I seem to remember that Korčula was mostly independent, but was 'allied' with Dubrovnik, in the latter half of the XII century.

No, no, I meant the recruiting itself, there is an option for recrituing nobles, but you get the same unit as if you recruited them from a Mercenary Camp, for example.

As for the sabres, haven't the Hungarians used them at the time?
If so, it isn't a stretch to think Croats used them as well.

I don't quite agree. I have no real knowledge about this in particular, but if Hungarian sabres were slowly replaced by normal swords as they "westernized", I don't see Croatian warriors taking on Hungarian old weapons, as Hungarians themselves were slowly replacing them.

I was just saying that Croats put more emphasis on Croato-Hungarian Kingdom, while the Hungarians and Westerners mostly call it only Hungarian Kingdom.

Yeah, it's the most common name, but it doesn't mean it's the most objective one.

Changing that must be deeply researched, in order to avoid any flame wars, although I already said that I'm not against adding Croatia with knightly order mechanics.

I would like to hear what someone Hungarian has to say on this matter.

The difference between the statuses of Croatia and Bosnia was the fact that Croatia was a 'faithful' part of the Kingdom, while Bosnia was making promise after promise to Hungary, often without the intention of keeping said agreements.
It seems Hungary never completely subdued Bosnia, due to Bosnia's geography/topography.

The thing about Croatia is that it's ruler was, in medieval times, an important member of the Hungarian royal family.
In this case - the King's brother, which turned Croatia from a "loyal part of the Kingdom" to the center of a rebellion.
It was all dependent on the period. Later on, some Croatian lords (like Paul I Šubić of Bribir) became so powerful that they ruled completely indepenedetly, much like Bosnia in 1200.

 

[Drevnibor]

​

Italian Dubrovnik? 
Haven't heard of that before.
'National currents' started in 19th century. Before that, people weren't so "nationally aware".

Well, from 1204 to 1358, Ragusa was under Venetian rule.
The Doges of Dubrovnik had to be elected amongst the Venetian nobility.
That's what I meant by ITALIAN Dubrovnik.
As my old friend once said:
''Every nation thinks that a piece of land belongs to them, because they claim they were there before the current owners''.

The pro-Serbian current made a pro-Serbian census. 
They went by the Karadžić's "Serbs - everyone and everywhere" concept, where the Shtokavian dialect was declared Serbian-only.

Yes, but bear in mind that they were a ruling Serbian party, which mean they got elected as leaders of Dubrovnik, despite being Serbs.

But as I said before, it seems that Dubrovnik was always strange.
For example, native Ragusan Mavro Orbini is called a Croatian historian, by the Croats themselves, even though his greatest work - History of the Slavs, consists around 80% of the history of the Serbs, with only a few pages of the Croatian history.

Serbs were called Dalmatians [by the Byzantines]? Wasn't "Dalmatians" the name for old Romans at the time?

Dalmatia was a province in the Roman Empire, like Dacia, Thracia, etc.
But as I said before, it seems that the Byzantines had a rule of rarely calling us the Serbs (a term which we used, of course) but still calling our country Serbia (a term which we DIDN'T use in those times).

For example, I read the chronicle of the Battle of Tara, by the contemporary Roman (Byzantine) historian, Joannes Kinnamos.
In that battle, a joint Serbo-Hungarian army lost to the Byzantines.
During the entire chronicle, Kinnamos uses the term PEONIANS for the Hungarians, and DALMATIANS for the Serbs.

Contrary to that, Byzantine princess-historian Anna Komnene, in her work called Alexiad, talks about the rule of her father, Emperor Alexios I.
In it, there's a part where she talks about her father's wars against the Serbian Grand Prince Vukan, and she uses the term SERBS for the people, while calling their country DALMATIA.
Confusing stuff indeed.

I don't quite agree. I have no real knowledge about this in particular, but if Hungarian sabres were slowly replaced by normal swords as they "westernized", I don't see Croatian warriors taking on Hungarian old weapons, as Hungarians themselves were slowly replacing them.

Strange - I always thought that a cruved sword (i.e. sabre) is a weapon much better suited for cavalry, than a regular, straight sword.
There's a fresco from a Serbian monastery in Peć, from the year 1316 - it shows Archangel Michael wielding a sabre (sorry for the small image):

confirming the existence of such weapons south of Hungary.

[of adding Croatia] I would like to hear what someone Hungarian has to say on this matter.

I don't know if there's any Hungarian on this board, and I also don't know who did the Hungary research, back in the day.