Oruc
Reactionary
Cleric said:
I wasnt referring to Imperium nor your suggestion but that of North Kings.
Ideas and Development--Story NES
- Thread starter North King
- Start date
I wasnt referring to Imperium nor your suggestion but that of North Kings.
Kozmos
Jew Detective
emu said:
yarrr okay
Israelite9191
You should be reading
As I said Das, read "Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World." Also, after signing off, I thought of a better example. The Tlingit natives of southern coastal Alaska have a matriarchal society for pretty much the exact reasons I mention for the Gulf societies.
About the calendar, it is about equally accurate to the Chinese one. This one, just like the Chinese calendar, adds a month every 2-3 years alternating based on what number it falls on in the 19 year cycle. The reason I chose this calendar over the Chinese calendar is that this calendar is ENTIRELY lunarly calculated while the Chinese calendar uses the moon to calculate the months and the sun to calculate the year. The Greek calendar is very innacurate, as well as being luni-solar, not lunar. The Egyptian calendar, while mathematically consistent, is not lunar and is hurrendously innacurate, about 60-70 times more innacurate that the calendar I proposed.
I actually kind of agree with NK, aside from some specific cultural anomilies (calendar months, deities, etc.) English should be used for simplicity. For other cultures additional things can be translated.
As for the islands, fine. If you want to equate them to Samoa which is closer in island size and distribution, that is fine with me, my analysis still pretty much stands.
I think what we really need now is a 2000 BCE or so map so that the preliminary history can be written.
About the calendar, it is about equally accurate to the Chinese one. This one, just like the Chinese calendar, adds a month every 2-3 years alternating based on what number it falls on in the 19 year cycle. The reason I chose this calendar over the Chinese calendar is that this calendar is ENTIRELY lunarly calculated while the Chinese calendar uses the moon to calculate the months and the sun to calculate the year. The Greek calendar is very innacurate, as well as being luni-solar, not lunar. The Egyptian calendar, while mathematically consistent, is not lunar and is hurrendously innacurate, about 60-70 times more innacurate that the calendar I proposed.
I actually kind of agree with NK, aside from some specific cultural anomilies (calendar months, deities, etc.) English should be used for simplicity. For other cultures additional things can be translated.
As for the islands, fine. If you want to equate them to Samoa which is closer in island size and distribution, that is fine with me, my analysis still pretty much stands.
I think what we really need now is a 2000 BCE or so map so that the preliminary history can be written.
Insane_Panda
Deity
I am quite happy with all the progress you guys have made in forming an idea of this Empire.
I agree with both das and NK on many points, though on the question of religion, I am inclined to agree with das. The largest and most stable Empires of our history have always been inclined towards a limited secularity, with religion being used as a tool of the state. However, over time, the Empire will manage to overcome all of the challanges that have ever faced it, and shall rule supreme. This would, in the eyes of Empire, probably require some justification, and inevitably, minds would run towards the superiority of the people of the Empire, and thusly, a superiority of their leaders and government, perhaps even creating the belief of a divine force which has allowed the people of the empire their greatness. This belief would likely be militant in nature, similar to, as das said, the OTL cult of Mithras. However, in order for there to be a strong enough anti-military and secularist movement, the religion cannot be too supreme over the citizens of the Empire, as there would not be any significant anti-military movements in such a case (as the other elements of society would simply view the revolutionaries as insane heretics). The religion must be, IMHO, quite ingrained into the psyche of the common man (and widely believed as fact by the lower classes) yet at the same time, the higher elements of society (the aristocracy, or the commercial and military elite) shall remain widely secular, whilst still promoting the religion to further their own success and the success of the empire. Thusly, the anti-military movement must be restricted to the upper echelons of society, until a great change utterly disrupts the society of the Empire, wiping away the foundations of the past and causing wide levels of discontent and chaos throughout the lower classes (for Japan, it was the defeat in WWII, for the Empire, it will likely be internal - as it has achieved such a complete hegemony over the world).
I do not really see the need for a matriarchal society, as the larger empires of OTL have been forged by patriarchal societies. Women are inclined, naturally, towards the more emotional. Men, towards the more practical and mathematical. If we require the formation of a large, overbearing empire, a patriarchal society shall suit us best, though in said society, woman should be granted considerable rights and oppurtunities for success. (as in Rome)
As for the development of tanks - I do believe they will be created, though I do not believe they will be widely used by the empire, or if they are, will not be heavy in nature, and will not be the main force by which the empire relies upon its power. The Empire will, as I see it, rely on its immense forces of sea and air to bring about the total destruction of their enemy's capability for war, and thus, bring about a forced surrender. The majority of the land units shall be mobile assault forces, deployed from the skies and the coasts in order to capture and destroy strategic locations throughout an enemy's territory and infrastructure (as such, these forces would remain relatively concentrated in nature, though not small, as the empire commands such huge manpower reserves and must be on guard accross the whole of the world). On the Northern masses of land however, I do see a future for tanks and larger vehicles, though these would be specialized to these areas. There would be no need for nukes, as the empire has achieved such a level of control where these are not neccessary, and that nukes, if ever spread through the world, would bring about a statemate, and thus keep the power of the empire in a limited check, as it could no longer stop upon any state it choses.
They should not, and will not, IMHO, be developed any time soon - until perhaps the empire reaches a state of total desperation, and begins a range of odd projects (similar to the later years of Nazi Germany).
In the navy, I do think Carriers (or some form of them) would be quite useful, but due to the limited prestige factor, I do not think they will be the flagships, nor shall they get the most emphasis. The empire, through its vast, and seemingly unexhaustable resources, will invest in things which communicate its prestige on a much grander level, and thusly, I see the creation of a core fleet of floating fortresses, which coordinate and operate as the center of the Empire's military operations. The floating fortresses would act as a mobile bases to control the navy, and the smaller fleets would be made up of the assault craft (such as missle cruisers) and the support craft (such as aircraft carriers). The primary emphasis of the navy would be to bring about an enemy's destruction on land and on the coast, as the Empire will, by now, achieved near complete control of the seas, excepting perhaps the pirates.
I agree with both das and NK on many points, though on the question of religion, I am inclined to agree with das. The largest and most stable Empires of our history have always been inclined towards a limited secularity, with religion being used as a tool of the state. However, over time, the Empire will manage to overcome all of the challanges that have ever faced it, and shall rule supreme. This would, in the eyes of Empire, probably require some justification, and inevitably, minds would run towards the superiority of the people of the Empire, and thusly, a superiority of their leaders and government, perhaps even creating the belief of a divine force which has allowed the people of the empire their greatness. This belief would likely be militant in nature, similar to, as das said, the OTL cult of Mithras. However, in order for there to be a strong enough anti-military and secularist movement, the religion cannot be too supreme over the citizens of the Empire, as there would not be any significant anti-military movements in such a case (as the other elements of society would simply view the revolutionaries as insane heretics). The religion must be, IMHO, quite ingrained into the psyche of the common man (and widely believed as fact by the lower classes) yet at the same time, the higher elements of society (the aristocracy, or the commercial and military elite) shall remain widely secular, whilst still promoting the religion to further their own success and the success of the empire. Thusly, the anti-military movement must be restricted to the upper echelons of society, until a great change utterly disrupts the society of the Empire, wiping away the foundations of the past and causing wide levels of discontent and chaos throughout the lower classes (for Japan, it was the defeat in WWII, for the Empire, it will likely be internal - as it has achieved such a complete hegemony over the world).
I do not really see the need for a matriarchal society, as the larger empires of OTL have been forged by patriarchal societies. Women are inclined, naturally, towards the more emotional. Men, towards the more practical and mathematical. If we require the formation of a large, overbearing empire, a patriarchal society shall suit us best, though in said society, woman should be granted considerable rights and oppurtunities for success. (as in Rome)
As for the development of tanks - I do believe they will be created, though I do not believe they will be widely used by the empire, or if they are, will not be heavy in nature, and will not be the main force by which the empire relies upon its power. The Empire will, as I see it, rely on its immense forces of sea and air to bring about the total destruction of their enemy's capability for war, and thus, bring about a forced surrender. The majority of the land units shall be mobile assault forces, deployed from the skies and the coasts in order to capture and destroy strategic locations throughout an enemy's territory and infrastructure (as such, these forces would remain relatively concentrated in nature, though not small, as the empire commands such huge manpower reserves and must be on guard accross the whole of the world). On the Northern masses of land however, I do see a future for tanks and larger vehicles, though these would be specialized to these areas. There would be no need for nukes, as the empire has achieved such a level of control where these are not neccessary, and that nukes, if ever spread through the world, would bring about a statemate, and thus keep the power of the empire in a limited check, as it could no longer stop upon any state it choses.
They should not, and will not, IMHO, be developed any time soon - until perhaps the empire reaches a state of total desperation, and begins a range of odd projects (similar to the later years of Nazi Germany).
In the navy, I do think Carriers (or some form of them) would be quite useful, but due to the limited prestige factor, I do not think they will be the flagships, nor shall they get the most emphasis. The empire, through its vast, and seemingly unexhaustable resources, will invest in things which communicate its prestige on a much grander level, and thusly, I see the creation of a core fleet of floating fortresses, which coordinate and operate as the center of the Empire's military operations. The floating fortresses would act as a mobile bases to control the navy, and the smaller fleets would be made up of the assault craft (such as missle cruisers) and the support craft (such as aircraft carriers). The primary emphasis of the navy would be to bring about an enemy's destruction on land and on the coast, as the Empire will, by now, achieved near complete control of the seas, excepting perhaps the pirates.
Symphony D.
Deity
Last time I will put forward my point, as I'm not as invested in this as the rest of you, and thus do not have the stamina or desire to be adamant on it. I do so simply for the sake of argument. Though they are perhaps neither the best nor most realistic example to be studying, consider The Empire from Star Wars. Virtually undisputed galactic hegemony. Almost endless forces of immense power. Yet, in the context of the movie and books, they built the Death Star. Why? It wasn't just a plot device. It was because Grand Moff Tarkin figured out sending a few dozen Star Destroyers to every minorly rebellious planet would be an extremely expensive and time consuming process, which would have to be repeated over and over again (No, I'm not a huge Star Wars fan, I read Wikipedia a lot when bored).Insane_Panda said:
The degree of indigenous peoples, sufficiently armed, organized and willing, to repulse massive effort to defeat them, has been demonstrated time and time again in our world, and has often required the total might of the empire to which they are opposed to defeat, and even then success is not guaranteed. Witness the American Colonies, Boers, Israel, Vietnam, Afghanistan...
The notion behind building such a large and ridiculously powerful weapon is it enables you to utterly wipe out an enemy at a moment's notice, without warning or possibility of retribution. It is seemingly omnipotent and unstoppable. It is perhaps not totally efficient as an actual weapon, but in the end it will save vast expense as now, the threat of utter and unstoppable annihilation from near perfect safety will instill a vast quantity of fear in the opponent. You will not need to deploy because many adversaries will simply be cowed into submission by threat alone, allowing you to concentrate on the really dangerous and suicidal ones.
Simultaneously, the weapon is so grandiose and of such effort to make that it is not reasonably possible for your opponents to replicate and acquire it in sufficient time to utilize it back against you. As such, you will be the sole possessor of it, and may actually go about using it on a whim as need be, instead of merely utilizing it as a bluff as they are used in our world. Lastly, it also functions well as an imperial maintenace device, as if things start to go south for the empire, a central repository of these weapons can be used to "ensure" loyalty.
In short, from a certain line of reasoning, for a vastly overstretched empire, nukes are not at all a bad idea, and indeed can be quite a good one. It would not make sense for them to be or become as developed as in our world, true, but I can see crude early examples being used quite regularly. That said, the opinion of the majority seems against me, but I supply this argument to you simply in an attempt to enhance your efforts.
Israelite9191
You should be reading
Panda, your comment on the female psychology vs. the male psychology is quite sexist. Also, women were far from liberated in the Roman society. It is true that women of higher birth enjoyed many liberties not available to women in other societies, but this was still very limited. I would say that fr our empire women would be more liberated than in Rome, closer to being on an equal level from an early time and much sooner on achieving full equality, even if the people aren't matriarchal.
I have been thinking, however, that perhaps a more realistic vision for our Gulf societies would be a matrilineal society that is, however, patriarchal. While the men, I will admit, are more likely to attain a patriarchal society due to the fact that the men are the providers. However, since they are still gone for long periods of time, women will achieve a higher level of participation and, more importantly, questions of fatherhood would be more likely. Thus, while they would be ruled by a king, the king would inheret his position from his mother, not his father.
I have been thinking, however, that perhaps a more realistic vision for our Gulf societies would be a matrilineal society that is, however, patriarchal. While the men, I will admit, are more likely to attain a patriarchal society due to the fact that the men are the providers. However, since they are still gone for long periods of time, women will achieve a higher level of participation and, more importantly, questions of fatherhood would be more likely. Thus, while they would be ruled by a king, the king would inheret his position from his mother, not his father.
Insane_Panda
Deity
It is not sexist, it is simply stated fact. Women, biologically, are more inclined towards the emotional, while men are, biologically, more inclined towards the mathematical. This has been proven in numerous scientific studies (women frequently major in English, instead of the Sciences or Math), and it does not degrade women in anyway, it is a simple state of the differences of our psychology. I'm afraid your mind has been clouded with too much PC.
I do support your statements on a matrilineal society, however.
I do support your statements on a matrilineal society, however.
North King
blech
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2004
- Messages
- 18,165
I'm all for gender equality, but in a patriarchial society, lineage is almost always through the male side.
Israelite9191
You should be reading
Many of those studies have been disputed Panda, but I will not discuss such a vague and highly emotioned topic.
Yes NK, in OUR world patriarchal societies are USUALLY patrilineal. There are numerous patriarchal-matrilineal societies in our world, although admittadly small compared to patriarchal-patrilineal societies. In THIS world, however, the goegraphy and topagraphy seems to suggest that a patriarchal-matrilineal society in the Gulf region is highly likely, and, in my personal opinion, the most likely kind of society to evolve.
Yes NK, in OUR world patriarchal societies are USUALLY patrilineal. There are numerous patriarchal-matrilineal societies in our world, although admittadly small compared to patriarchal-patrilineal societies. In THIS world, however, the goegraphy and topagraphy seems to suggest that a patriarchal-matrilineal society in the Gulf region is highly likely, and, in my personal opinion, the most likely kind of society to evolve.
Kozmos
Jew Detective
FFS if its an Empire it should be lead by men.
Israelite9191
You should be reading
Patriarchal means lead by men, matrilineal means that the male leaders inheret their position from their mothers.
Kozmos
Jew Detective
I knew that....IMO this is a trivial discussion. lets just say its led by men and move on.
Israelite9191
You should be reading
I like triviality, it adds flavor to a culture.
Oruc
Reactionary
which shoe do they put on first?
Israelite9191
You should be reading
The left of course, since the left is symbolic of the divine feminine.
erez87
Lord of Random
- Joined
- May 16, 2002
- Messages
- 13,500
Why don't you use the Mayan calender? Their extremly accurate if you know when to begin the counting and are easy to follow (ones you learn them anyway) their also cooler than the other 
(and every time they become 0.0.0.0.0 you can bring some other disaster! hehe)
(and every time they become 0.0.0.0.0 you can bring some other disaster! hehe)
Israelite9191
You should be reading
Its called sarcasm BananaLee (and if you are being sarcastic knowledgable that I was being sarcastic and I missed that, ignore this).
I didn't look into the Mayan. I will a little later.
I didn't look into the Mayan. I will a little later.
das
Regeneration In Process
I will read it if/when I find it; but I do repeat to you that neither the Mongols nor the Tlingits matter for this set-up; the Gulf is more similar to the Mediterranean than to Alaska or the Great Eurasian Steppe.
Let us keep this simple, please. Matrilineal societies and lunar calendars complicate this needlessly, IMHO.
Oh, not sure. Huge aircraft carriers aren't bad for prestige.
North King
blech
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2004
- Messages
- 18,165
Since the Empire is not the first civilization, they most likely imported their solar calendar from the agricultural civilizations that preceded them. As well as their patrilinialism.
