Capto Iugulum Background Thread

[Luckymoose]

All of them are? Are you ready to prove that Peter didn't live in Zaandam, the Netherlands, for several years less than two years, that his Grand Embassy didn't visit Brandenburg, Netherlands, Great Britain, and Austria, and that Catherine the Great wasn't German? I actually would love to read your version of Russian history.

BTW, if you actually read the article Shadowbound gave the link to, Peter visited Versailles in 1717, two decades after the start of his reforms. So the only thing that was really wrong about my previous post was literally that he never visited France.

Lucky, you're fun to play CI with, but sometimes you argue for the sake of arguing.

I don't think you understand the impact of French on all of European affairs during this period. Everything Peter experienced was in one way or another in vogue because of the French. Peter admired the French and his reforms reflected that. He did go to those other places, no one would say he didn't, but I think your version of European history is horribly skewed. This is elementary school history in the United States, what do they teach you in Russia?

 

[christos200]

And the French were in turn influnced by the Romans, who copied Greek culture. Which means that the Greeks are the best.

 

[Luckymoose]

And the French were in turn influnced by the Romans, who copied Greek culture. Which means that the Greeks are the best.

 

[Ahigin]

I don't think you understand the impact of French on all of European affairs during this period. Everything Peter experienced was in one way or another in vogue because of the French.

And the Jews. And the Arabs. And the Greeks. And the Romans. After you fail with proving me wrong, you switch to trying to prove that all the West was copying the French. This way, we may go very deep into the history of the West and the cultures it borrowed from. Peter borrowed directly from the Dutch and the Germans, end of story.

Peter admired the French and his reforms reflected that.

Actually, not. You're making stuff up. His reform of the government was a weird mix of Swedish, Prussian, Polish, and Russian traditions. His fleet was built to reflect the Swedish and Dutch approaches, and his army learned from the Swedes. Most of his foreign advisers were Dutch, German, and, rarely, British. The only thing he borrowed from the French was the art of field fortification, end of list. I do expect you to prove your point, not just make up statements on the spot.

He did go to those other places, no one would say he didn't, but I think your version of European history is horribly skewed.

Again, instead of bringing up the facts, you're just saying that I'm wrong. Kids argue this way in kindergarten.

This is elementary school history in the United States, what do they teach you in Russia?

Actually, no offence, but Americans are notorious across the world for being horrible in history.

 

[Luckymoose]

And the Jews. And the Arabs. And the Greeks. And the Romans. After you fail with proving me wrong, you switch to trying to prove that all the West was copying the French.

This alone is reason enough to not read the rest of your post.

 

[christos200]

We may have hugh unemployment, but we have more than 4,000 years of history, while you Americans less than 300.

 

[Circuit]

Lucky, you're fun to play CI with, but sometimes you argue for the sake of arguing.

That's just how Lucky rolls. You get use to it after a while (though I still sometimes want to pull my hair out and run out of the house raving mad).

The conversation about Russia certainly was interesting. Regarding Greece, I have doubts about modern Greece's tie with ancient Greece, due to a major interruption known as the Ottoman Empire that threw Islamic influences into the mix (the Byzantine Empire isn't really a disruption because they adopted Greek culture and kept it going). So I would imagine that the NES's Roman Empire has far more in common with ancient Greece and can be seen as more of a continuation of Greek culture than modern Greece.

But that's just a theory. I don't claim to be an expert on anything, much less history. If Americans don't know much history (as everyone else seems to say, according to you), that might be because the history that interests Americans (like most people) is their own, and it must be an amazing history considering how a country with less than 300 years of history has been able to reach the point it's at today. I'll also remind you the guy running this NES is both an American and a history major in college. However, let's not let this thread turn into Europeans vs. Americans.

 

[Lord of Elves]

In this case Lucky is right. Ahigin is patently wrong, in that he is committing the fallacy that somehow because the "trends" (if the political and philosophical writings and beliefs of the time can be called trends) which were invented or at least popularized in France were the product of other cultures and states that Peter the Great did not in fact pick up those trends from the French. He most certainly did. This is a very weird kind of historical hipsterism, in which Peter the Great is really copying the Talmud or obscure Spanish authors, who did what the French were doing first. I mean, sure, I guess. But that's a really arbitrary and weird line to draw just to be able to say that Peter the Great wasn't trying to emulate the French.

Peter the Great, and his reforms, were a product of the Francophilia which dominated intellectual circles in Europe at the time. Fact.

 

[Ahigin]

That's just how Lucky rolls. You get use to it after a while (though I still sometimes want to pull my hair out and run out of the house raving mad).

I have an easier time adjusting to this, since I'm parenting a toddler. You learn to ignore it when people can't handle being wrong.

However, let's not let this thread turn into Europeans vs. Americans.

I really was not going to, and I'm sorry if I did offend anyone by that statement. I just wanted to point out the fact that bringing a value judgement that one learned in elementary school in a country which school system is not very highly rated in the world is not gonna work in a conversation that requires facts and documents. Some Americans may say that America won WW2 singlehandedly, some Russians may say the same about the USSR, but if they base it on what they learned in an elementary school, without supporting statements, facts, and statistics, than their opinion really does not matter.

In this case Lucky is right. Ahigin is patently wrong, in that he is committing the fallacy that somehow because the "trends" (if the political and philosophical writings and beliefs of the time can be called trends) which were invented or at least popularized in France were the product of other cultures and states that Peter the Great did not in fact pick up those trends from the French. He most certainly did. This is a very weird kind of historical hipsterism, in which Peter the Great is really copying the Talmud or obscure Spanish authors, who did what the French were doing first. I mean, sure, I guess. But that's a really arbitrary and weird line to draw just to be able to say that Peter the Great wasn't trying to emulate the French.

Peter the Great, and his reforms, were a product of the Francophilia which dominated intellectual circles in Europe at the time. Fact.

You see, just like that, you make a statement not supported by any arguments, and then you say it's a "fact." This is the same way Soviet kids were taught in school to believe the Soviet Union won WW2 on its own, while other countries were safely observing the war from across the ocean (which is not quite true). I think this conversation would go much more productive and interesting, if people actually read on Peter the Great's biography AND the state of European science, social movements, and literature in the early 18th century. France was an important contributor to the Western culture, but Europe did not revolve around everything French (maybe, with the exception of fashion). It's just as naive, as to think that in the 19th century everyone was borrowing from the British, and in the 20th century everyone was looking up to the USA. World is much more complex.

 

[TheLastJacobite]

I just finished reading Robert K. Massie's biography of Peter the Great and he was most definitely influenced by the French, as was all of Europe in that time period because Louis XIV was still King of France. France was the largest and most populated country in Europe at the time, with famous French authors such as Voltaire were starting to emerge, the French military was best in the world and the Sun King himself as an important example to follow for any up and coming autocrat like Peter. French culture was the pinnacle of European style, with Versailles being "the" palace on the continent and the budding salons cultivating new ideas about government and politics. Peter's ideas on creating new tax systems (namely one based on how many people were in each household) was a direct copy of the French method. It was a fascinating read, one I picked up to help me better understand the nation I'm playing, since, as an American with a Bachelor's degree in history, I know nothing

 

[Lord of Elves]

You see, just like that, you make a statement not supported by any arguments, and then you say it's a "fact." This is the same way Soviet kids were taught in school to believe the Soviet Union won WW2 on its own, while other countries were safely observing the war from across the ocean (which is not quite true). I think this conversation would go much more productive and interesting, if people actually read on Peter the Great's biography AND the state of European science, social movements, and literature in the early 18th century. France was an important contributor to the Western culture, but Europe did not revolve around everything French (maybe, with the exception of fashion). It's just as naive, as to think that in the 19th century everyone was borrowing from the British, and in the 20th century everyone was looking up to the USA. World is much more complex.

This is pointless and disingenuous nitpicking. In a general sense it is very safe to say that the majority of Peter the Great's reforms were borrowed from what was considered to be efficient and superior by French philosophers, French writers and French statesmen. Whether these French philosophers, writers and statesmen borrowed and crafted their ideas from other writers of different cultural/national backgrounds is irrelevant. Ultimately Peter the Great was striving to emulate the French, and not Obscure Italian Writer #2514.

Arguing the inverse, that Obscure Italian Writer #2514 was the real source of Peter the Great's inspiration, makes about as much sense as saying that Ford is responsible for the invention of the modern computer because computers are built on assembly lines.

 

[Luckymoose]

Luckymoose wins again.

 

[Ahigin]

I just finished reading Robert K. Massie's biography of Peter the Great and he was most definitely influenced by the French, as was all of Europe in that time period because Louis XIV was still King of France. France was the largest and most populated country in Europe at the time, with famous French authors such as Voltaire were starting to emerge, the French military was best in the world and the Sun King himself as an important example to follow for any up and coming autocrat like Peter. French culture was the pinnacle of European style, with Versailles being "the" palace on the continent and the budding salons cultivating new ideas about government and politics. Peter's ideas on creating new tax systems (namely one based on how many people were in each household) was a direct copy of the French method. It was a fascinating read, one I picked up to help me better understand the nation I'm playing, since, as an American with a Bachelor's degree in history, I know nothing

Okay, what I see here is a statement that France was a dominant power in Europe at that time, which nobody is arguing with. The problem was that the French were actually very much okay with the Ottoman Empire keeping their positions in the Mediterranean and Balkans (as a counterweight to Austria), so Peter's proposal "help us modernize so that we can beat the Turks" was very coldly regarded in Paris when Peter was preparing his Great Embassy. As a result, the Embassy did not visit France, and as we've just figured out, even Peter himself did not visit the country up until the late years of his life. You have to understand that what was viewed as a great country in Europe was just another potential teacher for the isolationist Tsardom of Russia, and in the end Peter adopted the Dutch, German, and, partially, British and Swedish ways while keeping strong Russian absolutism. Thus, French did not become a language of Russian nobility up until late 18th century.

Also, about Voltaire. I think you should know, that when Peter the Great started his reforms, Voltaire was around five years old.

It's actually very interesting to see that American literature on Peter the Great doesn't even try to understand the way Peter himself and his surrounding viewed Europe. While Europe was looking up to the French, the Russians were learning from their closest neighbors without carrying much about who they learned their ways from.

Ultimately Peter the Great was striving to emulate the French, and not Obscure Italian Writer #2514. Arguing the inverse, that Obscure Italian Writer #2514 was the real source of Peter the Great's inspiration, makes about as much sense as saying that Ford is responsible for the invention of the modern computer because computers are built on assembly lines.

That brings us to the same dead-end street as before: we may as well say that Peter was emulating the Romans and Greeks, since the Enlightenment and Renaissance were all about the revival of the classic antiquity. It's not about where the Enlightenment originated from, it's about what specific countries did supply Peter with advisers, shipbuilders, and engineers. It's like saying the late 19th century Ottoman reforms were based on the British model, while disregarding the fact that all of the Ottoman advisers of that time were Prussians.

To simplify it for you, if somebody asks you for a cigarette, it does not matter who made this cigarette, the interaction happens between two people and not between the smoker and the tobacco company.

Luckymoose wins again.

Grow up, Lucky. You didn't say anything on the topic, so you're just an observer.

 

[qoou]

but Europe did not revolve around everything French (maybe, with the exception of fashion).

Mainland Europe*, there.

I really can't say anything about Russia, as that is further east than I know enough about, but the massive Franco-boner that continental Europe had for a while can even still be seen today, in all the loaned French words, customs, fashions, luxury activities, etc.

That bolded disclaimer above being made, I'm of the opinion that Peter the Great was indeed greatly influenced by French culture. Maybe not directly, granted, but France had a fairly pervasive influence on the rest of Europe's culture. I have no sources, other than my unreliable memory and understanding, to back this up though.

 

[Luckymoose]

Okay, what I see here is a statement that France was a dominant power in Europe at that time, which nobody is arguing with. The problem was that the French were actually very much okay with the Ottoman Empire keeping their positions in the Mediterranean and Balkans (as a counterweight to Austria), so Peter's proposal "help us modernize so that we can beat the Turks" was very coldly regarded in Paris when Peter was preparing his Great Embassy. As a result, the Embassy did not visit France, and as we've just figured out, even Peter himself did not visit the country up until the late years of his life. You have to understand that what was viewed as a great country in Europe was just another potential teacher for the isolationist Tsardom of Russia, and in the end Peter adopted the Dutch, German, and, partially, British and Swedish ways while keeping strong Russian absolutism. Thus, French did not become a language of Russian nobility up until late 18th century.

Also, about Voltaire. I think you should know, that when Peter the Great started his reforms, Voltaire was around five years old.

It's actually very interesting to see that American literature on Peter the Great doesn't even try to understand the way Peter himself and his surrounding viewed Europe. While Europe was looking up to the French, the Russians were learning from their closest neighbors without carrying much about who they learned their ways from.

I'm pretty sure you don't know a damn thing about your own history and are trying to backpedal to save face. "France wasn't" is the most pathetically incorrect view of history that ever existed. There is not a historian alive that would back you on this, nor any written records, mind.

Your comment on American literature is astoundingly misplaced. We have better Russian historians than Russia.

 

[TheLastJacobite]

I was just glossing over the main points. The book does in fact talk a lot about Russia's relationships with its neighbors: the civil war in Poland , the two (three?) wars against Turkey that Peter waged (gaining then losing Azov), the Great Northern War against Sweden, how Europe reacted to the Russian victory at Poltava, and the George I of England/Hanover's machinations to try and contain Russia later on.

But I didn't feel like making a huge post that most people would gloss over summarizing the book and instead chose to focus on the topic at hand.

And I for one feel that this derail has gone on long enough and will now change the subject.

@EQ How religious is the world of CI? Is everyone still going to church multiple times a week? And what are the rough number of members of the major religions, if you have them?

 

[Luckymoose]

@EQ How religious is the world of CI? Is everyone still going to church multiple times a week? And what are the rough number of members of the major religions, if you have them?

From my talks with EQ, I gather that the world is very much more religious than our own was in this period. You can probably blame that on a lag in liberal ideals, which we may never achieved. It would be cool to have Space Marine Priests.

 

[EQandcivfanatic]

As I have stated in the past, the (mostly Christian) world as a whole is substantially more religiously influenced than it would have been OTL at this point. There is a key difference as to the reasoning why: The Church (and Protestants) started the century discouraging war and was heavily against the Great War. While this made them unpopular at the time, it did not discredit organized religion to the same degree that the religious support for the OTL Great War did. Similarly actions to combat nationalism have led to more identification with religious institutions than with nationalities in some cases. As for the number of times people go a week, that I could not say, though I suspect in a nation like Russia is at the moment, the Church acts as a vital gathering place and nexus of the nation's communities. Especially considering that for most Russians lifestyle has not really changed in the past hundred years.

As for numbers, I don't track those, beyond some very loose stats per nation.

 

[Ahigin]

I'm pretty sure you don't know a damn thing about your own history and are trying to backpedal to save face. "France wasn't" is the most pathetically incorrect view of history that ever existed. There is not a historian alive that would back you on this, nor any written records, mind.

Your comment on American literature is astoundingly misplaced. We have better Russian historians than Russia.

Lucky, that's all you're capable of. Trolling. Enough said. Learn history, read books, it will help you with your low self-esteem. So far I've given you tons of historical accounts that back me up, and you haven't produced anything except for your immature babbling.

As for the rest, I really haven't heard a single historical account that backs up my opponents' side, except for TheLastJacobite mentioning of the Russo-Turkish wars (there were indeed two of them under Peter) and the Northern war against Sweden, neither of which had anything to do with France. Thank you, TheLastJacobite, for at least trying to keep the conversation constructive. I'm wondering what accounts does Robert K. Massie use to support his opinion of Peter the Great's fascination with the French culture, except for the fact that France was big and strong? I really want to know how he ended up saying what he is saying, not just for the sake of the argument.

UPD: While I'm still looking up the other three copies of original documents I read, here's the text of the military regulations written by the Saxonian officer Adam Veyde in 1698: http://my-shop.ru/_files/product/pdf/104/1032268.pdf It's in Russian, so you may need a translator. Anyway, Veyde's military regulations were practically copying the Saxon order of battle, not the French. It was because Augustus II the Strong, King of Saxony and Poland, was at the moment a Russian ally in the Northern war and was eager to provide the Russians with military instructors.

Also, while I'm at it, you may want to read about the German Quarter in Moscow, the only Western European neighborhood dominated by a particular culture in the whole history of Moscow: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_Quarter I read about it in Russian (the famous book by Nicolai Pavlenko), but I don't know whether the book ever got an English translation, so you'd have to read Wikipedia on that. Trust me, it's legit, I even visited the historical neighborhood during my only visit to Moscow (though nowadays it doesn't look like much).

UPD2: Also, for your notice, the word "nemets" (literally "the German") was used to identify all Western European foreigners in Russia up until the late 19th century. I guess, that's because of the Russian fascination with everything French.

 

[TheLastJacobite]

@Ahigin- A select sampling includes the following:

Constanin de Grunwald's Peter the Great (an English translation in 1956 of an earlier edition originally published in French)
Europe in the Age of Louis XIV (1969)
David Ogg's Europe of the Ancien Regime 1715-1783 (1967)
M.J. Scheltema's Anecdotes historiques sur Pierre Le Grand et sur ses voyages en Hollande et a Zaandum (1842)
M.M Shcherbatov's Journal de Pierre Le Grand depuis l'annee 1698 jusqu a la conclusion de la paix de Neustadt (1773)
S.M. Solovev's Istoriya Rossii s drevneishikh vremem (1960-1966), E.V. Tarle's Russkii flot i vneshnyaya politika Petra I (1949)
Among many many others. He also extensively uses letters and accounts from the various diplomats in Russia at the time, including the spread of Western customs and ideals into Russia.