Voting is open
Sertorius on Pt. IV 11/30/72-1/3/73 (post below is Rolman reply)
I'm a bit unwell, but I'll gladly pitch in:

These are strictly Russian in meaning, not Ruthenian and not even period appropriate in fact. When speaking about things Ruthenian, Ruski should be used (and Rusinki for females) and when about things Russian, then Muscovite or Moskiewski should be used. It was a way to differentiate between true Ruski (the people of the Commonwealth) and despotic pretenders (Moscow). Plus one of the titles of the monarch was the Duke of Ruthenia, therefore no other ruler could be called that.
I actually like that, really shows, that you know, what you're talking about. For those, that don't get it, it's a way of addressing the Orthodox Church's religious practice in a mocking way to show everybody that it's old-fashioned, stupid and downright superstitious.
"I am the Imperial Prince of Dubingiya and Birzhai, Stanislav Radzivil."
I don't understand the inconsistency with the naming convention here. Polish naming was generally used, yet you go for transliteration for some reason here. One more thing: the Radziwiłłs styled themselves to be one of the old Lithuanian princely families, therefore would omit the Imperial part, so as to not sound like just another nouveau riche which recently got their title from a foreign power, unless they are talking with German or other Western aristocrats (since an Imperial title would carry more prestige, than a Lithuanian one).
Ok, back to that naming convention... there is also the matter, that the Sapiehas themselves preferred their name to be spelled just like that, using an H instead of G.
Kalvin and the Pravoslav'ya.
Kalvin stated like that refers only to the name of the theologian, although calling a somebody a kalwin was an informal way of naming a Reformed Church member. As to Orthodoxy, a better transliteration would be Pravoslavye or Pravoslavie.
several hundred meters
Ok, but the metric system should stay at home, since it can sometimes ruin the immersion. Even the modern Imperial system would sound better, since feet and miles were being used at the time, though they were not the same as today.


[X] Rather, to announce: attempt to deliver a speech before the assembled Sejm.
 
Last edited:
I'm a bit unwell, but I'll gladly pitch in:



These are strictly Russian in meaning, not Ruthenian and not even period appropriate in fact. When speaking about things Ruthenian, Ruski should be used (and Rusinki for females) and when about things Russian, then Muscovite or Moskiewski should be used. It was a way to differentiate between true Ruski (the people of the Commonwealth) and despotic pretenders (Moscow). Plus one of the titles of the monarch was the Duke of Ruthenia, therefore no other ruler could be called that.

I actually like that, really shows, that you know, what you're talking about. For those, that don't get it, it's a way of addressing the Orthodox Church's religious practice in a mocking way to show everybody that it's old-fashioned, stupid and downright superstitious.

I don't understand the inconsistency with the naming convention here. Polish naming was generally used, yet you go for transliteration for some reason here. One more thing: the Radziwiłłs styled themselves to be one of the old Lithuanian princely families, therefore would omit the Imperial part, so as to not sound like just another nouveau riche which recently got their title from a foreign power, unless they are talking with German or other Western aristocrats (since an Imperial title would carry more prestige, than a Lithuanian one).

Ok, back to that naming convention... there is also the matter, that the Sapiehas themselves preferred their name to be spelled just like that, using an H instead of G.

Kalvin stated like that refers only to the name of the theologian, although calling a somebody a kalwin was an informal way of naming a Reformed Church member. As to Orthodoxy, a better transliteration would be Pravoslavye or Pravoslavie.

Ok, but the metric system should stay at home, since it can sometimes ruin the immersion. Even the modern Imperial system would sound better, since feet and miles were being used at the time, though they were not the same as today.


[X] Rather, to announce: attempt to deliver a speech before the assembled Sejm.
I appreciate your ongoing uhhh socio-cultural-linguistic assistance! Definitely my achilles heel over here, especially with language.

That being said, I actually was asking in the post below the update itself if "localization" -- that is to say, making him Stanislav Radzivil when speaking Ruthenian -- was jarring or confusing or not. It's kind of just a flavor thing with a vague practical aspect of denoting spoken language so I certainly am glad to hear your input as I'm not married to it. My whole localization thing with this quest is a mess... Anybody wanna be my editor..... not really

Regarding "icon-clutcher," it was a bit of a happy accident to have an (implied) lapsed Calvinist use this term for a Catholic but it's likely all just the same shit to him.

And lastly I appreciate the the editorial note on the metric system! Maybe time to learn the Polish table(s?) of measurement...

Good to hear from you as always!
 
Kir on the development of "Russia(s)" as a place name
I'll add that, at the time of the quests, "Rosiyskyi" would likely be used by the monks and clergy in Kyiv, who dabbled greatly in making Hellenized versions of local words, and would not become widespread in Moscow itself until the second half of the 17th century: the vassalization of Cossack Ukraine and the following increase in cultural exchange, the establishment of control over the Kyiv Orthodoxy, the 1674 Synopsys (a Muscovite-specialized history book, written in Kyiv, but recounting the rise of Muscovy from the times of Meshech or Mosoch, seen as the founder of both Moscow and Poland), and the move of prominent clergy, such as Stephan Yavorsky and Theothan Prokopovych, to the north, trying to establish their influence on how the tsardom would be reformed. So, until the second half of the 17th century, after the Nikonite reforms and Old Believer rebellion, you'd be unlikely to hear the Hellenized "Rossiya" anywhere but amongst the Kyiv upper classes, but not so much at the court of the Tsar in Moscow, not until the later years of Alexei I's reign, or Princess Sophia's regency (as the Hellenized forms can be seen written on their royal portraits). There may be some discrepancies (like people in both Commonwealth and Muscovy, Ivan the Terrible included, trying to build upon the etymological similarity between the name of the ancient tribe of Roxolanii and Rosias), but usually in 16th and early 17th centuries the local variant Rus', or its Latinized variants, such as Ruscia/Ruzzia/Ruthenia/Russia (pronounced in Latin as "Roose-ia", rather than "Rush-ah") were more commonly used.

And that's not even going into how "Rus specifically" would mean Kyiv if used in local sources, and Galicia if used nearly everywhere else. If you ever handled the many Burgundies of the 15th-17th centuries' maps, the many Ruthenias can be a similar pain in the head, where you can not even rely on distinct titles, but mostly on tendencies in bibliography and cartography. I can find maps with Galicia described as, alternatively, "the" Russia, Red Russia, or Black Russia, as the names "migrate" over maps in the course of, seemingly, a single decade.
 
Yet another runaway leads me to declare the end of voting to be in circa 48 hours from now!

should've known they always pick the riskiest one…

also, here's a literal straw poll on a mechanic I was considering trying: I was imagining breaking down moments of high sensitivity (physical or social danger, arguments etc) into "quicktime" events with short updates and more granular choices. As opposed to a more on the rails you-get-what-you-get experience put out in one update. Really can't figure out which is wiser so thanks for any input!
 
24 hour warning!

double warning that a continued vote-drought will make me antsily close it early and get to posting, so if you're procrastinating get rolling!
 
[X] Rather, to announce: attempt to deliver a speech before the assembled Sejm.
 

Scheduled vote count started by Rolman on Jan 2, 2024 at 6:58 PM, finished with 24 posts and 17 votes.
 
IV-II. January 7, 1573. Warszawa, Polish Crownlands.
You feel very good about it. Shockingly. Sir Marszowski taught you how to be a man; all it took was his urging to bring it to the forefront, you hope.

In the nightmares you find yourself no longer fleeing down the streets of Paris but instead turning about and slaying the pursuing wolf-man. Yet, always, from some dark corner emerges another, an ambush, and you awake as snout meets throat.

So it never gets better. You used to pray on it and think on it and walk streets and gardens whenever possible. Now you must work and become a prince, the Prince. You find it funny that you've technically failed in your duties – you've spoken to only a few of the lords and clerics in favor of practicing rhetoric, though according to Marszowski word of a brief meeting with Lord Firlej have perked up ears in castle and camp alike. You try to ignore the words of cousin Sierotka.

You're just being paranoid. But– isn't that the point?

You sit in the Sejm with a secret in your breast. You have nearly memorized your own script – the speech ought to seem spontaneous, you calculate – and as an angry bishop delivers remarks to cheers and jeers you realize that he is doing exactly the same. This is how these people live; these are no teenage intrigues in the Louvre.

You let a Firlej imitator give a little oratory and decide to wait for a real ultra so the crowd will be angrier. I'm not in this for pride's sake, after all, am I?

When a lieutenant of the Cardinal's makes a resolute stand against Protestantism you realize your moment has come.

You begin to rise and of course the nerves hit now. But it's too late to stop.

"My lords!" you bellow, projecting as far as you possibly can without a voice crack.

Dozens of heads whip and turn around at once and people from further out begin yelling indistinctly. A few closer ones you can hear: "shut up! The Radziwiłł is talking!" "The Litwin is talking, so quiet!"

Time to preach what you practiced. A speech such as yours will be weighty, perhaps over an hour long, filled with referential digressions and philosophical discourses as expected – it is important to show what you know as well, after all.

But at its core, your oration is based upon…

[] A stand for the protection of rights and privileges new and old.

[] A plea for tolerance based upon Biblical study.

[] Your recounting of St. Bartholomew's Day.

[] A forward-looking, humanist dream rooted in the Classics.

[] Write-in.


Nobody worry, you'll get to read (most of) it.
 
Last edited:
[X] A plea for tolerance based on your story of St. Bartholomew's Day.

We tell the bloody truth about the events of France and ask "Do the nobles want rivers of blood on the streets of cities!? Do they want fields and estates scorched in a religious riot?! Do these noble people want their wives and children to burn at the stake because soldiers don't have time to be everywhere?!"

We tell them that these conversations in Warsaw are harbingers of a storm that will demolish the very foundation of Union and Stability.

And those who count on a quick, unburdensome victory in the religious are idiots (and he clearly has no place in this room), those who want to burn the entire Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth in a religious fit are a dangerous idiot.
 
[X] A plea for tolerance based on your story of St. Bartholomew's Day.

Actually, St. Bartholomew's Day was the immediate reason why the Warsaw Confederation was created in the first place, so that nothing like that will happen in the Commonwealth, especially with a Frenchie on the throne.
 
Actually, St. Bartholomew's Day was the immediate reason why the Warsaw Confederation was created in the first place, so that nothing like that will happen in the Commonwealth, especially with a Frenchie on the throne.
Fortunately, the nobles do not know this.;)

This speech will create the first impression of our hero. It will show that we want mutual prosperity, not empty hatred. And for this purpose he is ready to make an (almost) accusatory speech in front of the most powerful people in the kingdom. Determination and courage are valued.
 
[X] A plea for tolerance based on your story of St. Bartholomew's Day.

Actually, St. Bartholomew's Day was the immediate reason why the Warsaw Confederation was created in the first place, so that nothing like that will happen in the Commonwealth, especially with a Frenchie on the throne.

Indeed it is true -- Sierotka is noted to be aware in Chapter I -- but this is a firsthand witness from a highly prominent house, so it's bound to attract a lot of attention; that was my thinking behind it
 
Voting is open
Back
Top