Printable View
Hi what is this thing with the Papal names??
Traditionally when a Cardinal (or in theory anyone) is elected to the Papacy has an option to change his name and take a more religious name such as Gregory, Urban, Alexander, Pius etc.
In MTW2 Popes-elect take really weird names like Pagenellus or Ventura.
Shouldnt this be fixed in a patch? or teven better the Faction controlling the winning Cardinal to choose a name for his Petrine Ministry?
Well there had to be a Pope Urban I so maybe this will be the first Pagenellus or Ventura.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_popes
As you can see, while over time they did tend to gravitate towards the illustrious names of their predecessors, many many Popes have chosen outlandish names too (Pope Lando ? :laugh4: ).
I agree.
Late antiquity and early medieval Popes used their own baptismal names like Lando with the exception of priest Mercurius in 536 (i guess) who reigned as John II and Pietro Canepanova in 987 or somewhere near who reigned as John XIV. All other Popes especially after 1067 and the new elections regulation by Pope Nicolas II did changed their names to something more religious with the exceptions of Adrian VI in 1523 and Marcellus II in 1555 who reigned under their baptismal names.
Shouldnt MTW2 fixed that and allow a name change to something more historical accurate?
So wouldnt be historically accurate and correct to fix that so all Future Popes take more religious names like Julius, Pius, Innocent, Clemens etc.?
It would be better if we could number them also!!!
An example: when the game starts the current pope is Gregory, he could have been known in the game as Gregory VII (which was his actual name).
When Gregory VII dies the College elects-lets say- Cardinal Aston of England who assumes the name Hadrian (see? a more religious name) and then becomes known as Hadrian IV.
What do u say folks???
Who agrees with me?
i think it'd be cool if they let you name your own units instead of getting them auto name... or have them auto-name to begin with but with the option of changing it..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_popes
I rather like Pope Linus, Patron Saint of comfort blankets.
:laugh4: :laugh4:Quote:
Originally Posted by Beefeater
Imagine him up in Heaven... Too good to be true.
Anyway I would just prefer if the parent faction gets to choose between a few names. Two classical names and one less classical and perhaps the old name.
If we can make our own names this site and all other gaming sites would soon be spammed with Pope 1337, Pope Dweep, Pope Liar ect ect (and a lot of names I have chosen not to name but I suppose you can imagine as easily as I can)... Which I have a feeling the Vatican would be somewhat less than pleased about.
I can just see the headlines before me.
"International Crisis: Pope excommunicates British videogame developer Creative Assembly.
The Pope went out to mass last sunday with a venomous attack on the videogame developer Creative Assembly, famed for its succesful gamingfranchise Total War.
"I call on all righteous Catholics to mount a Crusade to the British Isles and Australia, to burn the heretic sect Creative Assembly. They have been slandering the holy seat in which We sit. Short of suicide by the developing team We will not back down.
Now eat and drink while I go give the scrofolous Danes a good whacking. Those villains dared invade Hamburg."
"Welcome, I'm Pope Lando Calrissian. I'm the administrator of this Papacy."
Actually, the jokes come too easy...
"The Lando Province?"
"Lando's not a province... he's the Pope!"
:oops: Sorry for not really adding anything productive to this.... do agree that there should be more 'numbered' popes using common names once inawhile, but not exclusively using only established ones... we ARE changing history after all....
I made a note of this problem in the bug list. The Papacy isn't the only faction using the wrong name lists for their Leaders, the Byzantines have a similar issue. I have a pope Abbate and Orsellus, definately NOT appropriate names at all. Let's just hope the game is simply referencing the wrong name list. Cheers!
Arggh... Hadrian IV holds a special place of disdain in my heart for his Bull Laudibiliter. That'll teach em to elect an English Pope.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cardinal-Bishop
First of all, I think there should be a log of past Popes.
The Cardinal choosing his own name, I think, is part of the idea that the characters in the game have their own personality, for lack of a better word. I would however also like to see numbering (i.e. Gregory VII), even if it is some odd, new, non-historical set of names.
...I mean, England never had a King Walter, but I do. Now that I think of it, I would like to see some repeats in the Kings names as well (i.e. Henry II, William II (Rufus? I know is was his nickname, but...).
Adrian IV wasnt the one who donated Ireland to the English Crown?
He did that because of the forged Donatio Constantini which aleggedly gave the western half of the empire to the Roman Popes.
This is proven to be a forgery dated back to Pope Stephen II.
Anyway i would like to see Popes in Medieval 2 take names like Paul, Callixtus, Pius etc. and numbered also.
This should be fixed in the patch.
You're talking about something else. Adrian IV's Bull Laudibiliter charged Henry II with taking over Ireland under the pretext of reforming the Church.
I kinda like Pope Hilarius...
U can check it out in Wikipedia Lord...
I verified it in wikipedia, The Catholic Encyclopedia and Britannica Encyclopedia.
The Bull of Adrian IV was Based on the fake Donatio Constantini...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adrian_IV
So what if it was based on the Donatio Constantini. He still issued the Bull.
On a forged document... drafted only to serve the papacy.
Practically Adrian IV gave away something that was never his...
Legally this Bull was null and void from the beginning by canon and civil law...
Sounds like standard practice to me. And I think it would be incorrect to call the the Bull "null and void." But all of this is irrelevant. The fact is, Adrian IV issued the Bull Laudibiliter, which was the first step toward the English annexation of Ireland.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cardinal-Bishop
Whether or not he had the legal right to do it or not is not the question. He did it.
It is also important to note that Henry II did not seize on the moment the take Ireland. He was too busy with other things (France). It wasn't until after the situation with Diarmuid MacMurrough and when some of his own subjects began to accumulate land in Ireland that he felt a need to take the place. Dublin anyway.
Henry II used this bull to invade and intervene to Ireland as it is written in history...
Remeber Ireland did had Kings of its own back then.
Actually he used the pope (who was englishman too Nicholas Breakspear of St. Albans) to give an excuse to his plans to annex ireland.
After all modern historians dispute if the bull was ever issued since the original copy does not exist and the earliest copy dates back to 1530...
Not exactly. By the time Henry had "invaded" Ireland, some of his Norman subjects had already been there and conquered Dublin, Wexford and several other areas that I can't remember off the top of my head. Remember Strongbow? What Henry did, more or less, was remind his subjects that they were in fact subjects of England.
I realize that his document is a bone of contention among historians, but it is not correct to say that all modern historians dipute the existence of the Bull. Me, for instance. There are a lot of documents that we don't have originals of. The reason I am inclined to believe it existed is because there are contemporary accounts that refer to the bull (Gerald of Wales).
I know that Ireland had kings. one of them, Diarmuid MacMurrough, invited Henry II to Ireland to help him take control and eventually recruited the same Normans who conquered over the next few years.
Shortly after his coronation, Henry sent an embassy to the newly elected Pope Adrian IV. Led by Bishop Arnold of Lisieux, the group of clerics requested from Adrian a privilege authorising Henry to invade Ireland. Most historians agree that this was the papal bull Laudabiliter. W.L. Warren asserts that Henry acted under the influence of a "Canterbury plot;" Archbishop Theobald of Bec, John of Salisbury, and other Canterbury clergy wished to assert their hierarchical supremacy over the newly created Irish diocesan structure. Other historians have argued instead that Henry intended to secure Ireland as a lordship for his younger brother William.
This is a copy of wikipedia...
It says that Henry was planning to annex Ireland long before Adrian IV so he pressed the newly elect pontiff to issue (if it was ever issued) the Bull.
He used the pope to secure his interests in the island,
That is a theory, yes. What Henry's plans were will forever remain a mystery.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cardinal-Bishop
..And please, Wikipedia is perhaps the most unreliable source of information available.
This part of wikipedia i quoted is the exact copy of Britannica encyclopedia 1911 edition...
And thats the theory most historians agree that is closer to the reality...
Henry was in good terms with the Papacy as long as Adrian IV was Pope....
When he died he fell out with his succesors and he got excommunicated by Pope Alexander III after the assassination of Archbishop Becket and the kingdom was placed under interdict.
...and like any other encyclopaedia entry, it is a very broad generalization.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cardinal-Bishop
I don't think I know what you mean by this. What theory? That Henry was planning on conquering Ireland? Maybe, but a lot of that is conjecture. That the Pope and Henry II were conspiring? Yeah, probably.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cardinal-Bishop
Whatever the case, it is fact that when Henry took Ireland (the parts of Ireland that he did take) he took from the Normans, who were his own subject to begin with, and had been "conquering," for lack of a better word, Ireland for the previous two years. The Normans were there because Diarmuid MacMurough approached Henry II for help. Henry refused, but allowed MacMurrough to recruit a mercenary force from around Wessex. Then things got out of hand.
I'm not disputing any of this. It makes perfect sense that the king of England had been on good terms with the one and only English Pope.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cardinal-Bishop
Henry was planning to take over Ireland and he was about to name his younger brother William as Lord of Ireland...
The election of Cardinal-Bishop of Albano who was an englishman was a blessing for him.
With a pope he could control he sent emissaries at once to Rome to press the pope.
Adrian IV used the fake Donatio Constantini to give pretext to Henry to intervene in Ireland (in reality Constantine the great never issued such a document)
Its ridiculous to think that the pope could decide who was going to be the king in any country of the western europe and who wasnt.
If donatio Constantini was true the pope could have revoked the right of Henry to be King when he was excommunicated and not place the entire kingdom under interdict.
To be honest. I don't think they even needed to refer to the Donation in this case. The Bull tries to justify itself. It goes under the pretext of reformation of the Church.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cardinal-Bishop
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cardinal-Bishop
It may be ridiculous to you or I, but to people in the 12th century, perhaps not. I think that in reality the Donation of Constantine probably didn't mean too much to either the King of England or any of the Kings of Ireland. I also think that public opinion was likely to sway in favor of the Pope regardless of why or by what merit, other than the office, the Pope decided to do things. I don't think it can be stressed enough, the role that religion played in the Medieval world.
Don't think the popes part is a bug at all - it was probably intended so as to avoid any legal issues with the Vatican, who certainly would have things to say about the game representing the names of real popes... After all, they can't be too pleased with the possibility of players assassinating them and what notQuote:
Originally Posted by Julius_Nepos