I’m not taking the blindfold off your eyes anyway…
honestly this argument falls flat because british is a nationality or at least super-nationality.
1 Like
The British is of the same nationality as the Russian who comes from Far Siberia and his ancestors were forcibly Russified - - maybe not that drastic, but you know what’s going on.
Super-nationality is not nationality. According to this logic, each empire had a unique supernationality of its own!
you mean like french? who where formed of just as many local cultures (actually more) than the british are, you only think of the british this way because they are more internationally talked about rather than things like Corsica or bretony.
Following this path, do not forget about the Spaniards.
As I see that you have deviated a lot from the purpose of the forum, I remind you that AOE-3 has the option of including those nations not powerful enough such as mercenaries or minor facsions.
Furthermore we assume that developers always rely on historical evidence to implement a new civilization.
1 Like
that is correct,the civ of the Germans represents the whole Holy Roman Empire of the Modern Era (1517-1806) (Bohemian war wagons,Austrian doppelsoldners,Polish uhlans,Bavarian settlers wagons,Prussian royal skirmishers)…at no time does it attempt to represent a specific country…last could put as an advance to imperial age the politician “the holy emperor” with an image of Charles V and change the name of the homecity to Hamburg…
2 Likes
What does this have to do with the thing you respond to?
Danubians is not a people group, unless you have sources backing this up. At most its an artificial term made by people who want to add a multi ethnical empire into a game were the civs are people groups, with one exeption.
Also for the British people group: British people - Wikipedia
British doesnt purely refer to being from Great Britain isles.
Prussians is a people group, yes. But that is Old Prussian. Prussian in AoE III timeline was basically German with small differences in customs.
Its people groups, not countries or political entities/structures.
Exactly one unit is non German, which again, the war wagon is typically Hussite. There were also German hussites (although majority Bohemian) But again, 98% ≠ 100%, thats exactly why I used 98.
They already have a presence. Again even if you dont agree they are fully represented, saying they are not even present is just idiotic.
This in itself shows that you lack knowledge on even curreny political structures. The EU is not close to becoming an united states. Far from it. They are talking about making an EU army, but that doesnt make it a US, the US is way more centralized than the EU is.
EU member states are more independent than the HRE member states. States like Prussia are anomolies. There were hundreds of small states, the largest amount were dependent on the others.
Its futile because you lack knowledge. And because you do you clinge to false ideas which you refuse to release when people give valid criticism or arguments.
Not a single civ represents the entire country. Japanese doesnt, Russians doesnt, Lakota doesnt. Its simply impossible. Even if you create a Prussian civ, it is impossible to include everything. It doesnt matter you dont like it, its a fact that the Prussians and Austrians are present in the Germans civ. Needle gunners were Prussian and if you are denying that, you are truely historically oblivious to German history.
Austria-Hungary, Austrians, Danubians etc. Reread past posts if you want to know why.
Russia? You mean prussia? Caps lock isnt going to give your arguments any validity. Prussia was in the HRE, again a fact. It doesnt matter parts of it were outside it. Prussia was a member of the HRE, held a electoral position in its government and had seats in the imperial diets.
The capitol of Brandenburg-Prussia and later just Prussia was in Berlin, which you guess it. Was in the HRE. You truely dont know history of the HRE and Germans.
Where did I say Hungary was part of the HRE? I said Austria, which it was.
I am about 99% sure I know more about the HRE than you do. I am also fairly sure I know more about Austria than you do, and I am thinking Prussia probably aswell.
Are you one of the guys that believes Voltaires quote?
It seems to me as an incorrect statement. It is well known fact that many states mainly on the border with France slowly drifted away from the imperial power and becoming semi-vassals of the French Crown. Especially after 1648 it was obvious HRE wouldn’t be united and not to mention about the whole tax and duty system within HRE where each state had its own policy. I am not sure with the civil law and its frames but I suspect it would be very individual as well.
Today’s EU is more united in terms of duties, free movement of people/labour, trying to elaborate united tax policy, common law frames…
So in my opinion in-game Germans represent mostly the HRE until 1648 (or about that time). Whatever came after that date is omitted from the game (except for Uhlans and needle gunners).
1 Like
Every EU member state has its own taxing policies, just like the Imperial states.
Every EU member state pays taxes to the “central government”, just like the Imperial states (as far as I am aware)
The imperial states also had common law.
There was also free movement between the people within the empire as far as I am aware. Maybe some states declined it, but pretty sure generally you could go anywhere in the empire ad Imperial citizen.
Almost everything the EU has going for it, the HRE has aswell. With on top of that an Imperial army which for as now is more than the EU has.
Those numbers if true at all, wouls be around 3 member states, when there were hundreds. Lorraine had a pretty big border with France, so there werent many other bordering states. Not to mention that they werent vassals of the French crown and it would really surprise me if they were semi-vassals. Do you have sources for this?
That the HRE wouldnt be completely centralized was already pretty clear around 1200, dont remember the exact date. But there is a difference in being united and centralization. Spain was a union between Castille and Aragon and even more for a pretty long time. The HRE was a union sort of in itself, due to the titles of kingdom of Germany, Kingdom of Italy and Kindom of Burgundy being put together. The HRE wasnt very well centralized, but they were also not not united.
The Canadian revolution makes sense because of New France,the founding of the Canadian Confederation in 1867 and the various rebellions that took place in Montreal and Toronto in 1837 and that of Louis Riel in 1870.
Yes. I wrote the EU tries to elaborate a common tax policy. The other thing is that within EU there are tax witholding laws etc. so one income (e.g. from dividends) is taxed just once. I am not sure if in the HRE there was any such practice like seperate states negotiated a common tax frame. I doubt it.
Hm… yes and no. I read how Stauffen emperors had to rely on their own dominions because that was their main tax income. From that I deduced there were no imperial budget which was at disposal for the emperors. Maybe that could change into times of AoE3… But with respect to Austrians and their grateful stance they got Bohemia under the rule (one of the most richest region in the HRE from tax perspective) I deduce nothing had changed…
Thats right. But it was very “raw” frame.
I am not sure with that. Because of the feudal system and serfdom I doubt that every Joe could decide to leave the country and just move to the other side of the empire. Yes, there was immigration mainly because the ruler invited people groups from overcrowded regions…
The depth of EU agreement and common framework is definitely immense…
I wrote semi-vassals meaning they were not their vassals de jure but de facto yes. Meaning they often cooperated with French, had secret non-aggression pacts etc. That shows the imperial authority here was very limited.
I dont have exact sources but I can mention:
Barring the loss of Franche-Comté in 1678, the external borders of the Empire did not change noticeably from the Peace of Westphalia – which acknowledged the exclusion of Switzerland and the Northern Netherlands, and the French protectorate over Alsace – to the dissolution of the Empire.
Source: Holy Roman Empire - Wikipedia
There I can click through to Treaties of Nijmegen - Wikipedia. There is a mention of Münster switching sides, how some city-fortress remained in French hands.
Then I read this book:
https://www.amazon.com/Saint-Empire-Rapp/dp/2235022707/ref=sr_1_5?dchild=1&qid=1631536365&refinements=p_27%3AFrancis+Rapp&s=books&sr=1-5
Yes, this book is dedicated to the period before AoE3 but well describes trends on western border of the empire. Saying it simply, Paris was closer then Nurnberg, Prague or Vienna… Cultural import, dynastical marriages with French ruling family…
Yes and no. Lets say the Staufen dynasty was the last dynasty which somehow managed the whole empire. Later Luxemburgs with Charles and Sigismund were close to it but I am not sure how much. And then Ferdinand II. came with his dream of one centralised and unified empire with oficial catholic religion. At least in that way he was dreaming when the 30 Yrs war broke out.
With unlimited sources from America, with Spanish professional armies backed by army of Catholic league he dreamed he would crush the protestants and rule…
Source: Amazon
1 Like