I never said that. Byzantine Empire in the Middle Ages is just as in-between Europe and Asia.
2 Likes
But, considering how Byz were one of the biggest if not the biggest influence over Eastern Europe, saying that Georgia isnt closer to European culture doesnt make much sense to me
1 Like
I’m sorry but this also doesn’t make much sense to me altogether.
1 Like
I mean, isnt Byzantine culture the second most influential culture of eastern europe after the slavic culture? If Georgians are closer to Byzantium than to anything else, wouldnt it make more sense to put them with eastern Europe than with Seljuks and Sassanids?
1 Like
Georgians are Europeans. For the same reason Cumans are Asian.
I would not put them with what’s considered “Eastern Europe”. Why do you think Georgians are closely culturally related to the Byzantines?
Religion surely separates and unites cultures but for example judging just from their looks, Georgians don’t seem too far off from Turkic people. Am I wrong?
1 Like
Georgian architecture is very very close to Byzantine and the culture and warfare are far more similar to European culture than to anything on Asia.
So yes I think you are prob wrong
Why did you remove the photo? I was about to post this to prove the opposite:
As I previously mentioned, religion is what mostly unites peoples and cultures.
With Byzantines and Georgians both being Eastern Orthodox it doesn’t surprise me that they have similar architecture, especially well-preserved churches from the Middle Ages.
I was rather considering their ethnicity but the Caucasus is such a special case and melting pot of the cultures that surrounded them throughout the ages that it’s really hard to group them anywhere.
Search Georgian knights ww1
Removed it because I felt like it wasnt really European enough to use as evidence
Okay. Did you see the photo I linked? If someone told me they were Turks, I would believe them. Of course some similarity to Greeks can’t be disputed either. Of course Christianity is a big factor regarding their identity.
In the end I advocate for the whole Caucasus to be treated as its own special thing because from what I’ve seen and read, they combine both European and Asian customs and traditions.
I feel like that isnt turkish enough to use as evidence either
And let’s not forget about the Armenians who are even closer to the Turks, geographically and therefore also culturally. While being Christians which makes them unique but doesn’t rule out that they’re a part of Asia though.
We don’t think of Turks either when talking about “Asia” but neither exactly when thinking of “Europe”.
1 Like
Armenians are a bit trickier, but imo Georgians are far closer to Europe
I can agree on that. Closer to Europe is a good call.
1 Like
The civ name is the least of the problems. But if you call this civ Wallachians, Moldovans and Transylvanians will feel left out. Call this civ Romanians and it won’t be a problem.
Georgians are themselves - above all;)
It would be best to ask some Georgian who I feel - European, Asian, maybe Eurasian or maybe just Caucasian?
Ethiopians are Christians, but do they have anything else in common? Even Ethiopian Christianity is significantly different from the European one.
1 Like
Nope, it’s actually pretty accurate. That’s more or less how the area looked and was inhabited. You could probably sprinkle in some Saxons. (The Turks were the invaders, so they make sense as the invader faction)
It’s fun to get to switch between factions in a Campaign. But it would be nice to give the Magyars/Hungarians their own campaign
2 Likes
I would just like to add that Caucasian Christians are closer to the Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church than to the Russian Orthodox Church or to the Byzantine Orthodox Church. Why?
The Caucasus was the area of the first Christianized state - Armenia, which had no contact with the rest of Christianity, hence it developed its independence and individuality.
So, Caucasus civs such as Georgians and Armenians are Christians, and they were part of the Russian Empire. But when you look at the nature of both their Christianity and even the Russian Empire, you will say that it is not Europe or Asia - it is Eurasia.
3 Likes
No, it doesn’t make sense. Why should the Slavs and Hungarians repay Romanian duchies?
Due to this caricatured campaign, people consider Romanians to be a Slavic nation.
As a curiosity, I would like to add that in EU 3 Romanian and
Albanian for South Slavic cultures and Hungarian for Western Slavic.
Personally, it irritated me a lot.
As an Eastern European I think I have the right to be irritated when I see Westerners degrade and negate my region - for them Eastern Europe is all Slavs (or more indifferently - only Russians), just …
I want games to break the stereotype of Eastern Europe as a third world region, a Russian colony and inhabited by barbarians.
4 Likes
There was no such thing as Romanian duchies. Romania wouldn’t be a concept for Hundreds of years.
Vlachs (that would be considered something like ancestors to Romanians) made up a relatively low number in terms of %. They wouldn’t become a majority until the wars with the Ottomans wipe out huge portions of the established cities populations (due to attrition as well as actual sieges)
I think they’ve done a good job in adding major eastern european factions into the game. Bulgarians, Magyars, Poles, Lithuanians. The Slav civ I suppose now largely represents the proto-Russian civilizations.
I think the thing that would be nice to have is a campaign for Magyars (their raids into Europe during the 900’s would be a fun Campaign idea imho, lots of raiding, and who doesn’t like a good old raid 
), and maybe some Campaign for Slavs, e.g. about Moscow or some other major duchy (e.g. Novgorod).