Subscribe to download
Merrick's Kievan Rus'

"+15% Culture and +1 Amenity in cities with a Trade Route to an ally."
Is broken for sure , I do not get anything
shame about it

Please update :)

@xflomasterx
I'm not sure what you mean in the second part of your comment, are you talking about ъ being "u" in Old Russian or about Kiev originally sounding more like Kiev? Either way, my point was that Kiev was originally called most similarly to Kiev, as stated by Ukrainian linguists like Yaroslav Rudnitsky.

@xflomasterx
That's simply not true, what language does Russian evolve from if not Old Russian? Every linguist agrees that Old Russian is the older stage of the Russian language, the distance you are talking about is probably because of Old Church Slavonic influence that came with conversion to Christianity, it's why in Russian the months are called in their Latin names, while in Ukrainian they are called by their Old Slavic names. There was also other influence in the Russian language, but that doesn't make it not descended from Old Russian. English today is descended from a purely Germanic language, but today it has huge Latin influence, that doesn't make Old English not a stage in the same English language.

@knjaz cos its not. Rus and ukrainain ARE different stages of one language, but russian, despite its name - not. it is easily proven by linguistic distance. So Кыѥвъ and Київ are chronological versions of word, while Киев - its translation.

I can see what is ur point, but at this time it seems more like unwilling to accept proofs of opposite. Transcriptions of Кыѥвъ can be easily googled, so it is not a question of beliefs but rather "do we arguing in science field or we are going to praise mystifications"

@xflomasterx
Ok, so why did you say Kiev is an exonym by going from "rus/ukrainian" to Russian if that is also a case of different stages of the same language? And also does not represent different nations.

Ъ is a technical sign in modern Russian, but in Old Russian it is likely that it was a separate sound, this is still the case today in Bulgarian. But my point there is that the name for Kiev back then was not Kyiv, but closest to Kiev.

@knjaz Old ruthenian and Old rus are just languages (even more: it is just chronological STAGES of development of one language) and do not represent different nations/countries so translation (even mor - adaptation) from them is not an exonym

And if u refer to old refers of name: in Povest' vremennykh let (one of the most citated historical text from 12 century) it was referred as Кыѥвъ which can betranscripted as K-y-je-v (last letter is just techical sign, not separate sound)

@xflomasterx
By this logic, "Kyiv" is a double exonym as well, since it comes from Old Ruthenian and then Old Ruthenian got it from Old Russian (and I suppose now it's in English as well, making it a triple exonym in your view). If you read any mention of Kiev prior to modern times it was always called Kiev/Kievu.

Kyiv is already exonym, while Kiev is double exonym ( from rus/ukrainian to russianand then to english) which makes no sense.
Kyiv is only option. Same as Rome, despite that russians read it as Rim

I think the Russkaya Pravda is broken! I don't get extra trade routs by having allies, and my cities don't get 15% culture for sending them a trade route.