Symphony D.
Deity
OOC: Silver does appear to be mostly correct.
ITNESI History Thread
- Thread starter das
- Start date
silver 2039
Deity
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2003
- Messages
- 16,208
Symphony D. said:
Of course I'm correct.
I am never wrong on this day and everyone must worship me. 
I take it you guys didn't like my idea for an eskimo tribe. 
Lol
...reads the above post to get in on the talk...
Are you guys ALL historians? I mean, I love history and all but you guys take take the cake!!! *always wanted to say that* in a good way I mean
Lol...reads the above post to get in on the talk...
Are you guys ALL historians? I mean, I love history and all but you guys take take the cake!!! *always wanted to say that* in a good way I mean
Finmaster
The White Ghost
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2003
- Messages
- 2,716
HISTORY OF DACIA
(600-0 B.C.)
OOC: Since everyone else, then why not me? I decided, however, to do this from a different point of view; this is a story of Dacian history, it is NOT a list of Dacian kings. A list of Dacian kings can, however, be found at the end of this historical outlook. There is also a lot of information in this historical outlook which can not be found from any of my earlier stories.
Also, I’m trying to write this as objectively as possible. So this is all OOC. If and when I have included secret diplomacy in these stories (as objective history writing demands me to do), I would most kindly request that certain players who may or may not be shocked about it will not get too mad at me.
***
1. IN THE BEGINNING (600-350 B.C.)
***
And so it began..
Dacian culture developed from the need of protection; as Scythians and Illyrians kept raiding the Danube area during the first few centuries of the last millenium B.C., the farming culture in moden-day Hungary started to unify itself against oppressors that spoke a different language. A society was born, and in time it developed into a civilization. By 500 B.C., the country of Dacia was known throughout the world. Dacian people were genetically linked closely to Thracian and that way to Greeks, but their culture was very unique compared to Illyrians, for example, who also formed a nation of their own during the 6th century B.C. and who the Greek culture gave a far greater infuelce.
Dacia was placed in a geographical location what some people might call unfortunate; it was located directly west from Aramid Luca, the greatest empire of that time. South from it was Byzantine, Luca’s closest ally, and in the west was Illyria. Illyrian barbarian raids had been the reason why Dacia needed a society to protect themselves in the first place! In the north there were Scythian and German barbarians.
Later Illyria would pay for this in a devastating war (for them), but the first 300 years were rather peaceful despite the fact that Dacia was surrounded by a rather scary punch of nations.
***
Religion and Culture
Not much history was written about Dacia before king Oroles I rose to power in 350 B.C.. The few pieces of info that exist are religious writings. It has to be stated at this point that Dacia was not only a commercial but also a religious nation; in a matter of fact, the High Priest of god Zalmoxis was the king’s closest advisor.
Some Dacian religious books tell us about how the Dacian society turned into a real civilization: guided by the god Zalmoxis, the Dacians rose to the mountains near the Danube river and build strong fortifications against the Scythian and Illyrian raids. More and more farmers moved inside these protective fortifications, and soon Sarmizegetusa had developed into a great city, which would then turn into Dacian capital. City needed a leader, and a king soon rose to rule Sarmisegetuza and the land areas around it.
Dacia was born.
The modern-day Dacians believe that their high god Zalmoxis was also the first king of the nation, who ruled c. 590-570 B.C. and who was taken to heavens after his death, to rule all Dacians from there. This study was invented in around 200 B.C. by High Priest Decetrox who studied the Dacian holy writings carefully. He was the closest advisor of king Oroles III, who then adopted this theory into Dacian religion.
***
2. THE ARPAD DYNASTY (c. 500-259 B.C.)
***
Rise of the Arpads
According to old religious writings, a monk known as Arpad had received messages from god Zalmoxis himself, asking Arpad to make Dacians believe in him again. After a short religious uprising, the priests of the nation decided to place Arpad to the throne after his predecessor (whose name is, unfortunately, unknown) died without children.
Since the Dacians used a very bizarre calendar during that time, it is impossible to say exactly when Arpad the Holy ruled, but it has been estimated to be around 520-500 B.C.
Arpad I adopted the system according to which high priest was the king’s closest advisor, and also his follower to the throne if the king wouldn’t have any child. This rule would be later used to end the Arpad dynasty.
It was also around these times when boiled dog testicles, known as “hot dogs” to Dacians, became a traditional Dacian treat.
After king Arpad, the most important ruler of the Arpad Dynasty was king Oroles I, who ruled 350-331 B.C.. He started several libraries and started to keep track of all the trading that went on in Dacian lands, thus starting the “historic age” of Dacia; other than religious documents started to appear and since Oroles I, the names of all Dacian kings are known to us.
***
Oroles II
In 277 B.C., king Oroles II, who was known as the “Incompetent”, rose to power. He ruled for 18 devastating years.
His diplomacy with Aramid Luca is rather intriguing and has been kept as a Dacian secret until very recently. It appears that while king Oroles II tried to keep good relations with nations that were against Aramid Luca (especially Gaul and Kartyria), he had also made an important pact with Luca. A secret alliance, as he himself called it. Despite all this (or maybe because of it), he often hinted to Kartyrian leaders that he wasn’t exactly a lover of the Lucans.
These actions were very contriversial but it has to be admitted that because of this kind of “diplomatic manouvering”, Dacia could grow without getting harrassed by any of it’s neighbours. If the barbarian wars had not started in 270 B.C., the rule of Oroles II would have been just as peaceful time as the 300 years before him had been.
Oroles II was especially economically very incompetent. The reason why the entire Dacian economy didn’t collapse during his reign was partly because of luck and partly because high priest Burebista helped Oroles.
Oroles died because of food poisoning after eating a spoiled hot dog in 259 B.C.. He was 41-year-old and had no children, and therefore high priest Burebista, who was not related to the Arpad family, became the new king. The Arpad Dynasty was no more.
***
3. RISE OF DACIA (259-200 B.C.)
***
Barbarian Wars
After 300 years of peace, the barbarian wars continued in 270 B.C.. Fightings lasted for almost 50 years. While 300-400 years ago the attackers had been Illyrian and Scythian, now the Germannics were on a crazy rampage.
During the reign of Oroles II, the attacks were rather small. Only a couble of thousands of Dacian soldiers got killed, and the attacks always stopped on fortresses build near Sarmisegetuza, where the legendary fortress archers always managed to drive the invaders away.
Burebista, who was Dacian High Priest and who became the king in 259 B.C. since Oroles II died childless, raised a rather large army of militia from local population to defend their homeland against barbarian invasions. Militia’s actions were succesful, and for some time, the barbarian attacks stopped, allowing Burebista to concentrate on the Illyrian war.
Burebista was followed by Oroles III, also known as Oroles the Conqueror, in 238 B.C.. The ever-so-great Lucan Empire had fallen after war losses, and land areas in the eastern coast of the Black Sea which formerly belonged to Aramid Luca were now controlled by barbarians. Oroles saw this as his chance to gain access to the Black Sea. He started an aggressive and succesful war which nearly doubled the land size of Dacia. Access to the Black Sea was also gained, and the well-fortified city of Orolestusa was founded there.
In the west, the expansion continued with Oroles himself leading his armies on the battlefield.
The end to barbarian wars came in the battle of Erlau in 221 B.C. when a barbarian leader named Hermann beat the Dacian troops. Oroles was dividing his troops into two sections during each battle, to surround the barbarians, and Hermann learned to take advantage of this; he attacked the center of Dacian troops, which was the weakest point in the strategy that Oroles was using. After the loss in Erlau, Oroles invited Hermann the German over to Sarmizegetusa and peace was signed.
This peace gave birth to the nation of Ostland.
***
Burebista and the Illyrian war
A new dynasty was started when Burebista I was crowned in 259 B.C..
The Burebista Dynasty, which would rule Dacia for several centuries, was born.
When he started his career as a king, Burebista found himself in a strange position: his predecessor had accidentally grown a rather big and a rather well-educated army, wasting a whole lot of money away while doing so. Oroles II had truly been an incompetent and a very lucky leader. This was indeed an accident not to be put to waste; Dacia, being a commercial people, needed a port to the sea to conduct trade! Burebista was planning to attack Illyria, but there was one thing stopping him.
Illyria had just sided with Kartyria, Rome and Portugal, to form a huge coalition against the Gauls. For a while Burebista was, while negotiationg about it with the Luca-hating Kartyrians, planning to attack Byzantium, but dropped the plan not willing to get the great Aramid Luca attack him (altough at this point it was already starting to seem like Luca would eventually fall). Besides, Burebista still had respect for the secret alliance that his predecessor had signed with Aramid Luca, altough he often wondered if it was wise to be in such an alliance.
Illyria was attacked, and when Carthagia and Portugal started fighting each other, Kartyria and Rome were indeed unhappy with Dacia. But promising that Illyria could continue their war against Gaul after a vassalization, Kartyrians were satisfied. Coincidentally, after vassalization the Illyrians no longer wanted to fight the Gauls.
On a certain cold night in the fall of 255 B.C., the Dacian troops crossed the Danube river and entered Illyria. Usually the shore would have been fortified by Illyrian soldiers, but like said they were fighting the Gauls and their defence was thus very insecure. Dacians used their famous “blocking strategy” to reach the shores of the Mediterranian. It has to be remembered that the commercial Dacians needed a port to the sea badly, and now that goal was fulfilled.
Then, the Dacian armies turned south. After the Illyrian capital was taken out, the nation started to fall.
But Burebista was unhappy. He wanted a shore and a vassal; not an annexed nation with unhappy, rebellious people in it.
His next manouvers earned him the nickname “peacemaker”: crown prince Leo of Illyria would become the leader of a new, half-democratic Free Illyria (which would, of course, be nothing but a puppet country for Dacia). The country was set up immediately, and for Burebista’s further amazement, once southern Illyria had accepted this vassalization, northern Illyria fell under the rule of Prince Leo I, as the most loyal Illyrians fled the country.
The war came to an end in 15 years after it started, so it really was a quick campaign. 4 years later Burebista the Peacemaker died.
His legacy lives on in Burebistatusa, fomerly an Illyrian city on the coast of Mediterranian which Dacia controls. It has a strange mixture of Illyrian Illyrian Greek and Dacian Slavic cultures, and before his death, Burebista got to see the first ships of the Dacian naval forces be built there. It also soon developed into a center of trading.
The fact that barbarian wars were raging at the same time when Illyria was vassalized shows Burebista’s capabilities to handle his nation with his military forces.
***
The trip to Morocco
The most famous actions of Burebista’s son, king Oroles III, have already been written under “Barbarian wars”, but of course he did a lot more than just fight the barbarians.
It was during his reign, in around 200 B.C., when the religious reforms (which have already been mentioned earlier) took place.
Aramid Luca (soon to be known as Khorvashid Luca) was collapsing quickly while Carthage was on the rise, and the nation of Bosporan would soon be born in the northern coast of the Black Sea. Because of Luca’s downhill, Oroles abandoned the policy of his predecessors and turned to Byzantium, who had been Dacia’s friend before but mainly because both were friends to Luca (Dacia secretly, though).
Now Free Illyria and Dacia signed an alliance with Byzantium. Luca was forgotten.
Then Byzantium joined the anti-Carthagian alliance together with Kartyria and Rome. Dacia was drawn in by Byzantine. Some bizarre events took place; in 201 B.C., Oroles III found himself in northern Africa attacking the uppermost corner of Mauri, modernday Morocco. It was his style of leading to always be there in the frontline commanding his men personally. There, just when he heard that the new Byzantine emperor had betrayed them and joined the Carthagian side, he got an arrow in his chest and died at the age of 67, after ruling for 37 years.
His son, the new king Rholes I, withdrew from Mauri. He was rather mad at Eram Constantine, the new Byzantine emperor, for dragging Dacia into this situation. For a while he even considered some sort of a paypack, but realized then that it would not benefit anyone. Dacia withdrew from the war and signed peace with everyone.
***
4. AGE OF STAGNANCY (200-0 B.C.)
The ages of war were behind (at least for a few centuries). The only historically significant action during these two centuries was done by Decebalus the Wise; The nation of Ostland had been born in 221 B.C. but by the time of Decebalus, Dacia's eastern neighbour had collapsed due to tribal strife, and Decebalus managed to peacefully get most of the German tribes on his side. Other events during these two centuries included the Dacian fever, a disease which also had a great effect on surrounding nations, and building of fortresses, which was economiclly very expensive. These two were main reasons for the age of stagnancy, along with lack of good leadership (this was a problem especially in Free Illyria, Dacia's vassal).
King Rhemaxos II, who was the ruler in 0 B.C., decided to put an end to this age of stagnancy. Among other things, he started a new project; the academy of naval warfare. King Burebista’s faith in naval power had not been forgotten.
***
A LIST OF DACIAN KINGS (600-0 B.C.)
c. 590-570 B.C. King Zalmoxis (His existance as a king is a myth, he turned into a god after death)
570-520 unkown
c. 520-500 B.C. King Arpad I (“the Holy”
500-430 B.C. Unknown
c. 430-410 B.C. King Duras I
c. 410-370 B.C. King Cotiso I
370-350 B.C. Unknown
350-331 B.C. King Oroles I
331-324 B.C. King Duras II
324-301 B.C. King Duras III
301-277 B.C. King Duras IV
277-259 B.C. King Oroles II (“the Incompetent”
259-238 B.C. King Burebista I (“the Peacemaker”
238-201 B.C. King Oroles III (“the Conqueror”
201-187 B.C. King Rholes I
187-150 B.C. King Duras V
150-132 B.C. King Rhemaxos I
132-130 B.C. King Duras VI
130-119 B.C. King Duras VII
119-99 B.C. King Oroles IV
99-54 B.C. King Decebalus (“the Wise”
54-29 B.C. King Dicomes I
29-9 B.C. King Dicomes II
9 B.C.- King Rhemaxos II
***
ADDED AFTERWARDS: Reasons for the age of stagnancy (such as the Dacian fever, lack of leadership, etc..)
(600-0 B.C.)
OOC: Since everyone else, then why not me? I decided, however, to do this from a different point of view; this is a story of Dacian history, it is NOT a list of Dacian kings. A list of Dacian kings can, however, be found at the end of this historical outlook. There is also a lot of information in this historical outlook which can not be found from any of my earlier stories.
Also, I’m trying to write this as objectively as possible. So this is all OOC. If and when I have included secret diplomacy in these stories (as objective history writing demands me to do), I would most kindly request that certain players who may or may not be shocked about it will not get too mad at me.
***
1. IN THE BEGINNING (600-350 B.C.)
***
And so it began..
Dacian culture developed from the need of protection; as Scythians and Illyrians kept raiding the Danube area during the first few centuries of the last millenium B.C., the farming culture in moden-day Hungary started to unify itself against oppressors that spoke a different language. A society was born, and in time it developed into a civilization. By 500 B.C., the country of Dacia was known throughout the world. Dacian people were genetically linked closely to Thracian and that way to Greeks, but their culture was very unique compared to Illyrians, for example, who also formed a nation of their own during the 6th century B.C. and who the Greek culture gave a far greater infuelce.
Dacia was placed in a geographical location what some people might call unfortunate; it was located directly west from Aramid Luca, the greatest empire of that time. South from it was Byzantine, Luca’s closest ally, and in the west was Illyria. Illyrian barbarian raids had been the reason why Dacia needed a society to protect themselves in the first place! In the north there were Scythian and German barbarians.
Later Illyria would pay for this in a devastating war (for them), but the first 300 years were rather peaceful despite the fact that Dacia was surrounded by a rather scary punch of nations.
***
Religion and Culture
Not much history was written about Dacia before king Oroles I rose to power in 350 B.C.. The few pieces of info that exist are religious writings. It has to be stated at this point that Dacia was not only a commercial but also a religious nation; in a matter of fact, the High Priest of god Zalmoxis was the king’s closest advisor.
Some Dacian religious books tell us about how the Dacian society turned into a real civilization: guided by the god Zalmoxis, the Dacians rose to the mountains near the Danube river and build strong fortifications against the Scythian and Illyrian raids. More and more farmers moved inside these protective fortifications, and soon Sarmizegetusa had developed into a great city, which would then turn into Dacian capital. City needed a leader, and a king soon rose to rule Sarmisegetuza and the land areas around it.
Dacia was born.
The modern-day Dacians believe that their high god Zalmoxis was also the first king of the nation, who ruled c. 590-570 B.C. and who was taken to heavens after his death, to rule all Dacians from there. This study was invented in around 200 B.C. by High Priest Decetrox who studied the Dacian holy writings carefully. He was the closest advisor of king Oroles III, who then adopted this theory into Dacian religion.
***
2. THE ARPAD DYNASTY (c. 500-259 B.C.)
***
Rise of the Arpads
According to old religious writings, a monk known as Arpad had received messages from god Zalmoxis himself, asking Arpad to make Dacians believe in him again. After a short religious uprising, the priests of the nation decided to place Arpad to the throne after his predecessor (whose name is, unfortunately, unknown) died without children.
Since the Dacians used a very bizarre calendar during that time, it is impossible to say exactly when Arpad the Holy ruled, but it has been estimated to be around 520-500 B.C.
Arpad I adopted the system according to which high priest was the king’s closest advisor, and also his follower to the throne if the king wouldn’t have any child. This rule would be later used to end the Arpad dynasty.
It was also around these times when boiled dog testicles, known as “hot dogs” to Dacians, became a traditional Dacian treat.
After king Arpad, the most important ruler of the Arpad Dynasty was king Oroles I, who ruled 350-331 B.C.. He started several libraries and started to keep track of all the trading that went on in Dacian lands, thus starting the “historic age” of Dacia; other than religious documents started to appear and since Oroles I, the names of all Dacian kings are known to us.
***
Oroles II
In 277 B.C., king Oroles II, who was known as the “Incompetent”, rose to power. He ruled for 18 devastating years.
His diplomacy with Aramid Luca is rather intriguing and has been kept as a Dacian secret until very recently. It appears that while king Oroles II tried to keep good relations with nations that were against Aramid Luca (especially Gaul and Kartyria), he had also made an important pact with Luca. A secret alliance, as he himself called it. Despite all this (or maybe because of it), he often hinted to Kartyrian leaders that he wasn’t exactly a lover of the Lucans.
These actions were very contriversial but it has to be admitted that because of this kind of “diplomatic manouvering”, Dacia could grow without getting harrassed by any of it’s neighbours. If the barbarian wars had not started in 270 B.C., the rule of Oroles II would have been just as peaceful time as the 300 years before him had been.
Oroles II was especially economically very incompetent. The reason why the entire Dacian economy didn’t collapse during his reign was partly because of luck and partly because high priest Burebista helped Oroles.
Oroles died because of food poisoning after eating a spoiled hot dog in 259 B.C.. He was 41-year-old and had no children, and therefore high priest Burebista, who was not related to the Arpad family, became the new king. The Arpad Dynasty was no more.
***
3. RISE OF DACIA (259-200 B.C.)
***
Barbarian Wars
After 300 years of peace, the barbarian wars continued in 270 B.C.. Fightings lasted for almost 50 years. While 300-400 years ago the attackers had been Illyrian and Scythian, now the Germannics were on a crazy rampage.
During the reign of Oroles II, the attacks were rather small. Only a couble of thousands of Dacian soldiers got killed, and the attacks always stopped on fortresses build near Sarmisegetuza, where the legendary fortress archers always managed to drive the invaders away.
Burebista, who was Dacian High Priest and who became the king in 259 B.C. since Oroles II died childless, raised a rather large army of militia from local population to defend their homeland against barbarian invasions. Militia’s actions were succesful, and for some time, the barbarian attacks stopped, allowing Burebista to concentrate on the Illyrian war.
Burebista was followed by Oroles III, also known as Oroles the Conqueror, in 238 B.C.. The ever-so-great Lucan Empire had fallen after war losses, and land areas in the eastern coast of the Black Sea which formerly belonged to Aramid Luca were now controlled by barbarians. Oroles saw this as his chance to gain access to the Black Sea. He started an aggressive and succesful war which nearly doubled the land size of Dacia. Access to the Black Sea was also gained, and the well-fortified city of Orolestusa was founded there.
In the west, the expansion continued with Oroles himself leading his armies on the battlefield.
The end to barbarian wars came in the battle of Erlau in 221 B.C. when a barbarian leader named Hermann beat the Dacian troops. Oroles was dividing his troops into two sections during each battle, to surround the barbarians, and Hermann learned to take advantage of this; he attacked the center of Dacian troops, which was the weakest point in the strategy that Oroles was using. After the loss in Erlau, Oroles invited Hermann the German over to Sarmizegetusa and peace was signed.
This peace gave birth to the nation of Ostland.
***
Burebista and the Illyrian war
A new dynasty was started when Burebista I was crowned in 259 B.C..
The Burebista Dynasty, which would rule Dacia for several centuries, was born.
When he started his career as a king, Burebista found himself in a strange position: his predecessor had accidentally grown a rather big and a rather well-educated army, wasting a whole lot of money away while doing so. Oroles II had truly been an incompetent and a very lucky leader. This was indeed an accident not to be put to waste; Dacia, being a commercial people, needed a port to the sea to conduct trade! Burebista was planning to attack Illyria, but there was one thing stopping him.
Illyria had just sided with Kartyria, Rome and Portugal, to form a huge coalition against the Gauls. For a while Burebista was, while negotiationg about it with the Luca-hating Kartyrians, planning to attack Byzantium, but dropped the plan not willing to get the great Aramid Luca attack him (altough at this point it was already starting to seem like Luca would eventually fall). Besides, Burebista still had respect for the secret alliance that his predecessor had signed with Aramid Luca, altough he often wondered if it was wise to be in such an alliance.
Illyria was attacked, and when Carthagia and Portugal started fighting each other, Kartyria and Rome were indeed unhappy with Dacia. But promising that Illyria could continue their war against Gaul after a vassalization, Kartyrians were satisfied. Coincidentally, after vassalization the Illyrians no longer wanted to fight the Gauls.
On a certain cold night in the fall of 255 B.C., the Dacian troops crossed the Danube river and entered Illyria. Usually the shore would have been fortified by Illyrian soldiers, but like said they were fighting the Gauls and their defence was thus very insecure. Dacians used their famous “blocking strategy” to reach the shores of the Mediterranian. It has to be remembered that the commercial Dacians needed a port to the sea badly, and now that goal was fulfilled.
Then, the Dacian armies turned south. After the Illyrian capital was taken out, the nation started to fall.
But Burebista was unhappy. He wanted a shore and a vassal; not an annexed nation with unhappy, rebellious people in it.
His next manouvers earned him the nickname “peacemaker”: crown prince Leo of Illyria would become the leader of a new, half-democratic Free Illyria (which would, of course, be nothing but a puppet country for Dacia). The country was set up immediately, and for Burebista’s further amazement, once southern Illyria had accepted this vassalization, northern Illyria fell under the rule of Prince Leo I, as the most loyal Illyrians fled the country.
The war came to an end in 15 years after it started, so it really was a quick campaign. 4 years later Burebista the Peacemaker died.
His legacy lives on in Burebistatusa, fomerly an Illyrian city on the coast of Mediterranian which Dacia controls. It has a strange mixture of Illyrian Illyrian Greek and Dacian Slavic cultures, and before his death, Burebista got to see the first ships of the Dacian naval forces be built there. It also soon developed into a center of trading.
The fact that barbarian wars were raging at the same time when Illyria was vassalized shows Burebista’s capabilities to handle his nation with his military forces.
***
The trip to Morocco
The most famous actions of Burebista’s son, king Oroles III, have already been written under “Barbarian wars”, but of course he did a lot more than just fight the barbarians.
It was during his reign, in around 200 B.C., when the religious reforms (which have already been mentioned earlier) took place.
Aramid Luca (soon to be known as Khorvashid Luca) was collapsing quickly while Carthage was on the rise, and the nation of Bosporan would soon be born in the northern coast of the Black Sea. Because of Luca’s downhill, Oroles abandoned the policy of his predecessors and turned to Byzantium, who had been Dacia’s friend before but mainly because both were friends to Luca (Dacia secretly, though).
Now Free Illyria and Dacia signed an alliance with Byzantium. Luca was forgotten.
Then Byzantium joined the anti-Carthagian alliance together with Kartyria and Rome. Dacia was drawn in by Byzantine. Some bizarre events took place; in 201 B.C., Oroles III found himself in northern Africa attacking the uppermost corner of Mauri, modernday Morocco. It was his style of leading to always be there in the frontline commanding his men personally. There, just when he heard that the new Byzantine emperor had betrayed them and joined the Carthagian side, he got an arrow in his chest and died at the age of 67, after ruling for 37 years.
His son, the new king Rholes I, withdrew from Mauri. He was rather mad at Eram Constantine, the new Byzantine emperor, for dragging Dacia into this situation. For a while he even considered some sort of a paypack, but realized then that it would not benefit anyone. Dacia withdrew from the war and signed peace with everyone.
***
4. AGE OF STAGNANCY (200-0 B.C.)
The ages of war were behind (at least for a few centuries). The only historically significant action during these two centuries was done by Decebalus the Wise; The nation of Ostland had been born in 221 B.C. but by the time of Decebalus, Dacia's eastern neighbour had collapsed due to tribal strife, and Decebalus managed to peacefully get most of the German tribes on his side. Other events during these two centuries included the Dacian fever, a disease which also had a great effect on surrounding nations, and building of fortresses, which was economiclly very expensive. These two were main reasons for the age of stagnancy, along with lack of good leadership (this was a problem especially in Free Illyria, Dacia's vassal).
King Rhemaxos II, who was the ruler in 0 B.C., decided to put an end to this age of stagnancy. Among other things, he started a new project; the academy of naval warfare. King Burebista’s faith in naval power had not been forgotten.
***
A LIST OF DACIAN KINGS (600-0 B.C.)
c. 590-570 B.C. King Zalmoxis (His existance as a king is a myth, he turned into a god after death)
570-520 unkown
c. 520-500 B.C. King Arpad I (“the Holy”
500-430 B.C. Unknown
c. 430-410 B.C. King Duras I
c. 410-370 B.C. King Cotiso I
370-350 B.C. Unknown
350-331 B.C. King Oroles I
331-324 B.C. King Duras II
324-301 B.C. King Duras III
301-277 B.C. King Duras IV
277-259 B.C. King Oroles II (“the Incompetent”
259-238 B.C. King Burebista I (“the Peacemaker”
238-201 B.C. King Oroles III (“the Conqueror”
201-187 B.C. King Rholes I
187-150 B.C. King Duras V
150-132 B.C. King Rhemaxos I
132-130 B.C. King Duras VI
130-119 B.C. King Duras VII
119-99 B.C. King Oroles IV
99-54 B.C. King Decebalus (“the Wise”
54-29 B.C. King Dicomes I
29-9 B.C. King Dicomes II
9 B.C.- King Rhemaxos II
***
ADDED AFTERWARDS: Reasons for the age of stagnancy (such as the Dacian fever, lack of leadership, etc..)
Great history, Fin, should write my own version of t3h Punic War soon. @ silver: That guy Seife came to lecture at our school yesterday. Said something about geeks and religion and science and I zoned out pretty quickly. He did show things about science being hated. Being an amateur historian, I didn't really relate.
das
Regeneration In Process
Good work, Finmaster... About Ostland, my idea was that it disintegrated due to tribal strife, and eventually its lands were taken over by Dacians; we can assume that Decebalus was called "the Wise" for persuading most of the tribes to acknowledge his rule and to invite Dacian forces into Ostland, or something.
das
Regeneration In Process
OOC: As something of compensation for the lack of a weekend update, and generally it is a matter of interest for me. Also, contributions, corrections, comments and constructive criticism are encouraged. I might edit this.
The main purpose of this is to convey the philosophy of most of the peoples of said civilizations, their general perception of the world around them. There is also some social and cultural information. It was at first intended to be more of a cultural portrait, but priorities and inspiration changed, so I wrote this instead. Actually, to be honest, I'm not at all sure as to what I should term this, so I'll call it "cultural-philosophical" review.
IC:
Transpoenic-Mediterranean Cultural-Philosophical World in ITNES I, as of 0 BC.
A Basin Divided: General Information.
Completely unlike OTL 0 BC, the Transpoenic-Mediterranean (from hereon, TM) world, culturally and otherwise, is extremelly diverse and divided. Instead of OTL's monolithic Roman Empire, with a Greco-Roman culture, we have several states and empires, neither of which is culturally-similar to another. They are all very unique, and have few cultural links when compared to our world, though they definitely exist, as cultural ideas spread via trade.
One might say that the same is true everywhere in the world; but albeit indeed all nations are different from the other, Khmeria for instance is much more similar to Kalinga than Rome is to Carthage; and Caribia is, for all of its differences, more similar to Olmecia than Byzantium to Dacia. The cultural pluralism of the TM could perhaps be explained by the geographical diversity of the seas, with diffirent climates and terrains in different parts of TM shaping different peoples; this, combined with the devastation of the Great Transpoenic War, prevented any sort of an unification.
Such great diversity between local cultures caused much mistrust, and resulted in multiple wars between the local nations in the past, more numerous and more bloody than most wars elsewhere in the world. Right now, it could be said that the TM world has entered an age of nationalism; peoples of each nationality and, by extension, ethnicity regard all other nationalities/ethnicities as mortal enemies. The rise of ethnic awareness is most troubling, for it means that multiethnic empires, such as Carthage, Egypt and Bactrasha, are very much threatened. On the other hand, nationalism (or should it be termed "imperialism"), which in this case is loyalty to one's state, is doing much to override it, in Carthage anyway; but there, a nationalist religion is playing a very large factor. Now that we mentioned religion, one most note that it also plays a large part in the present rise of nationalism. Indeed, neither of the TM nations shares its religion with another, albeit missionary-engineered religious lobbies are not all that uncommon, especially in the Mediterranean regions. Add in religious differences to the already-existant national hatreds... and you get a very nasty situation. TM is a power keg waiting to explode.
Ave Roma: Roman Republic.
In a way, Rome could be said to be the most patriotic nation in TM, though for now Carthage surpasses it, objectively speaking. Roman republicanism was combined with a military tradition and a post-Great Transpoenic War (GTW) feeling of complete isolation have resulted in creating a highly patriotic and militarized society that nonetheless is quite democratic. This has much practical use for the Romans, as they can raise the best levy troops in the TM world should Italy be threatened. Rome also has a cult of strenght, with contempt towards subject peoples that didn't assimilate, and generally a heavy xenophobia. Anti-Hellenism (see below) is perhaps most widespread in Rome, with frequent pogroms of Greek merchants. Speaking of merchants, the Romans here are decidedly anti-mercantile, albeit out of pragmaticism the Senate still encourages external trade.
Cultural ascetism that has developed as a part of the Roman militarism has dealt no small damage to the cultural development, albeit it never was specifically imposed. Generally, Rome is beginning to look more and more like pre-Mydilos Sparta.
Greed and Piety: Dacia.
Entirely unlike Rome, Dacia is a mercantile nation. Trade was its foundation; the kingdom of Dacia itself in part appeared to protect the trade interests of Dacian tribes. Dacian merchants from the "Big Three" (Sarmisegetuza, Burebistatuza, Orolestatuza) cities are the driving force behind Balkan commerce, and play no small part in Black Sea and Adriatic trade neither. Dacia is particularily interesting because, due to its trade links, it has gotten very tolerant. Apart from a grudge with Byzantium and a paranoia towards the northern (Germanic) barbarians, Dacia has, if not good, then at least workable relations will all TM powers. This tolerance has made Dacia particularily appealing for Greeks (see below), who assisted it in climbing out of stagnation.
As a sideffect of the tolerance and of trade, Dacia has integrated cultural elements from other nearby nations, especially Luca and Illyria. This is especially visible in Dacian cuisine, which already was quite original. In combination with culinary traditions of their neighbours, this cuisine has evolved into perhaps the most rich in the world, and definitely the richest in the TM. Dacian chefs serve the ruling elites of all nations of the TM.
But, strange as it might seem, trade isn't everything for Dacia. Religion plays a fairly large part in the Dacian lives as well. Dacian Duotheism is combined with a king cult, and the high priest serves as the primary advisor to the king, not to mention the sucessor in the event of a lack of any heirs. Religion plays a much more important role in Dacia than anywhere else in TM.
Thus, most of the world tends to perceive your average Dacian as pious, yet greedy.
Powderkeg: Free Illyria.
The child of the Illyrian War, Republic of Free Illyria was and is a Dacian vassal. The people know it... and are bitterly divided over how to react to it. Polarization, political, economical and cultural, has taken place, and Free Illyria is tumbling towards a civil war.
Much like any other country, Free Illyria is divided into the world of the cities and the world of the villages, the citizens and the peasants. But the division here is along different lines. Whilst most peasants are neutral or support Dacia out of conservatism, they are also the ones that assimilated the least, and roughly 25% of the peasants belong to the anti-Dacian party. The administrative incompetence of the vassal government made them do so. On the other hand, the urban population is divided as well - whilst the oft-Duotheist southerners preffer status quo or, more likely, closer integration with Dacia, perhaps to the point of joining the two states into one, the northerners are bitterly anti-Dacian, often on romantic grounds of patriotism but also on economical grounds of raising tariffs on trade with Dacia and realigning trade towards Rome in part and towards home in other. They seek, above all, the restoration of a fully independant Illyria.
The ideological division between pro-Dacians and anti-Dacians has separated families, has damaged trade and is likely to soon spill out into something bloody soon. It has left no element of Illyrian culture untouched. And there can be no compromise now. The anti-Dacians are especially ruthless, and their xenophobia is much more fargone than that of, say, Rome. Anti-Hellenistic pogroms are widespread, and indeed most foreigners don't dare enter this country outside of Burebistatuza and the fortified path from there to Dacia Proper.
And what of the government itself? Well... It is incompetent. It is rapidly losing power to local governors and feudals, and they are even worse than the government officials. Corruption and weakness that are indivisible from the current government are loathed by both sides. A showdown is required.
The War of Gods: Byzantium.
Byzantium was, from the start, a multiethnic empire. Trojan refugees/colonists and local Thracians made up the original elite of the state, but Macedonians, Epyriots and eventually Greeks were ruled by the emperors as well. Peloponessian Greeks, or Spartans, were especially hard to integrate - they constantly rebelled, and even today most Spartans are more aligned towards Rome (or, prefferably, pro-Roman independance) than towards Byzantium. However, those Spartans were only the most obvious case. Macedonians, for instance, were no easier prey. Subjugated and often enserfed, they often enough launched small-scale revolts, and the poorest of Macedonians abandoned their fields and became bandits, attacking mostly Byzantine merchants and civil officials.
Cultural assimilation was the most obvious answer to these problems, perhaps, but it did not work enough at first. Indeed, Byzantium, in spite of most of its people being of essentially the same religion, only suffered from that - for Greek polytheism was increasingly divided into sects, often along national lines. It was during the reign of Eram V, some 100 years ago, that the Byzantine ruling elite, in the wake of the GTW and ensuing instability, decided that a new religion was needed - a one that will, like the Carthaginian one (see below), be BASED on patriotism and national duty. They took it one step further - they deified Eram I, and made all other emperors Demigods. Slowly, steadily, this religion was propagandized and made widespread. However, unlike in Carthage, the Byzantines didn't bother to include the old gods; albeit they were not explicitly forbidden, they were effectively "demoted". Needless to say, this, albeit bringing Thracians and Trojans even closer together, caused large problems outside of the northeast of Byzantium. Epyriots, Macedonians, Spartans, other Greeks - all of them turned to the old religion in even larger amounts than before. If earlier, these peoples were comparatively secular, now religion became the predominant issue. Just as the Byzantine Empire Cult united the loyalists, old Greek Polytheism united the rebels. Much like in Free Illyria, political disagreements affetceted the cultural sphere, but to an even greater degree due to religion becoming the primary issue.
And, just like in Free Illyria, a showdown is neccessary for Byzantium - or, at least, the Balkan region - to progress in any path. Unless, ofcourse, a new attempt of compromise is undertaken...
Blood and Empire: Carthage.
From the days of Hannibal Barcelona, Carthaginian ideology of Imperial Punicism (or Punic Empire Cult) was and remains the cornerstone of Carthaginian culture as a whole. And here, under Carthaginian, we mean Imperial Carthaginian, not just citizens of Carthage or Carthage-Phoeniceans. Celtiberians, Berbers, Gauls, Ligurians... indeed, nearly all of the people living in the Punic Empire of Carthage are considered Punic, even some of Greeks.
The disparate elements of Carthaginian society, both ethnically and economically different from the others, are all united by the Punic Empire Cult, which, unlike the Byzantine one, still does recognize and worship the old gods; its just that now, they are irrevocably tied to Carthage. Thus, rather than divide, the Empire Cult unites.
It is a matter of great irony that, while Rome's theoretically more egalitarian ideology has produced a xenophobic culture, the theoretically xenophobic culture of Carthage has produced a somewhat tolerant society. Greeks, for instance, are tolerated, even though they have to pay a special tax. The Carthaginians have adopted many ideas from Greeks, Celtiberians, Berbers and even Dacians (with whom they maintain trade links and whose famous chefs are constantly employed by the imperial family). They didn't copy blindly; rather, they assimilated and integrated those things that went along with the Imperial Punic doctrine. Carthaginians, in contrast to Romans, are also very extravagant and "cheerful", encouraging arts, especially architecture and sculpture. On the other hand, one must note that Carthage has, over time, developed an unofficial caste system; this was created by the need to maintain their strenght in spite of rising competition. Warriors and sailors are much less tolerant than the others; indeed, they are often as ascetic as Romans. The estrangement of warriors from the ruling elite was already the cause of a civil war, and if this were to progress further, a new such war might come. The priests are also increasingly "worldly" and integrated with the ruling elite. The merchants are, naturally, the most tolerant - but this also brings problems of them being the least protected from sedition.
Carthage is a strong empire, and as long as it remains stable and, if at war, triumphant, it is unlikely to face many problems with the social differences any time soon; as said before, the Empire Cult allows the Empire to maintain cohersion. But if defeat were to come...
Phoenix Rising: Egypt.
Egypt, too, has an Empire Cult, and it is the least different from its traditional religion as Empire Cults go. Indeed, a Pharaoh always was a god, so there was no need to further deify the ruler of Egypt. All that has changed was the addition of a Carthaginian-style patriotic work ethic and the racial theory that, all-in-all, was really the formalization of the old Egyptian ideology and nothing more. The old gods are still revered.
However, in recent times, sun worship gradually became the most important element of Egyptian religion. Not officially yet - but Aton is becoming increasingly close to heading the Pantheon. There are many factors, such as pharaonical patronage, but let us concentrate on its symbolical importance - for the phoenix, a mythical bird that dies to be reborn, is associated with sun worship. And for Egypt, which has like no other empire experienced the cycles of rise and fall, the phoenix is the most obvious state symbol. Egypt was an empire once, a great and powerful empire that was brought down by rebels; but now, it rose again. Just like the phoenix, it only dies to be reborn.
This cyclism and persistance has resulted in a society that can survive great shocks, confident that good times will come again. But the people of Egypt are also constantly reminded that just by waiting for things to get better, they won't achieve anything. Ramses V, just like his predecessors, constantly works to strengthen the empire. Due to the difficulties facing it two centuries ago, Egypt had to tone down its xenophobia and arrogance to a certain degree, and to invite foreign (mostly Lucan and Greek (the latter was an especially tough choice, as the Greeks, not without reasons, are held responsible for the old Civil War), but also Carthaginian) specialists to reform the state and the army, to re-invigorate commerce and to build up a strong new fleet. Egypt, albeit still fairly conservative socially, has crash-modernized and reformed itself into the regional power it is today, and reforms did not yet cease.
Egypt is on the rise, and the people are confident that even if it falls, it will once more rise from the ashes.
The main purpose of this is to convey the philosophy of most of the peoples of said civilizations, their general perception of the world around them. There is also some social and cultural information. It was at first intended to be more of a cultural portrait, but priorities and inspiration changed, so I wrote this instead. Actually, to be honest, I'm not at all sure as to what I should term this, so I'll call it "cultural-philosophical" review.
IC:
Transpoenic-Mediterranean Cultural-Philosophical World in ITNES I, as of 0 BC.
A Basin Divided: General Information.
Completely unlike OTL 0 BC, the Transpoenic-Mediterranean (from hereon, TM) world, culturally and otherwise, is extremelly diverse and divided. Instead of OTL's monolithic Roman Empire, with a Greco-Roman culture, we have several states and empires, neither of which is culturally-similar to another. They are all very unique, and have few cultural links when compared to our world, though they definitely exist, as cultural ideas spread via trade.
One might say that the same is true everywhere in the world; but albeit indeed all nations are different from the other, Khmeria for instance is much more similar to Kalinga than Rome is to Carthage; and Caribia is, for all of its differences, more similar to Olmecia than Byzantium to Dacia. The cultural pluralism of the TM could perhaps be explained by the geographical diversity of the seas, with diffirent climates and terrains in different parts of TM shaping different peoples; this, combined with the devastation of the Great Transpoenic War, prevented any sort of an unification.
Such great diversity between local cultures caused much mistrust, and resulted in multiple wars between the local nations in the past, more numerous and more bloody than most wars elsewhere in the world. Right now, it could be said that the TM world has entered an age of nationalism; peoples of each nationality and, by extension, ethnicity regard all other nationalities/ethnicities as mortal enemies. The rise of ethnic awareness is most troubling, for it means that multiethnic empires, such as Carthage, Egypt and Bactrasha, are very much threatened. On the other hand, nationalism (or should it be termed "imperialism"), which in this case is loyalty to one's state, is doing much to override it, in Carthage anyway; but there, a nationalist religion is playing a very large factor. Now that we mentioned religion, one most note that it also plays a large part in the present rise of nationalism. Indeed, neither of the TM nations shares its religion with another, albeit missionary-engineered religious lobbies are not all that uncommon, especially in the Mediterranean regions. Add in religious differences to the already-existant national hatreds... and you get a very nasty situation. TM is a power keg waiting to explode.
Ave Roma: Roman Republic.
In a way, Rome could be said to be the most patriotic nation in TM, though for now Carthage surpasses it, objectively speaking. Roman republicanism was combined with a military tradition and a post-Great Transpoenic War (GTW) feeling of complete isolation have resulted in creating a highly patriotic and militarized society that nonetheless is quite democratic. This has much practical use for the Romans, as they can raise the best levy troops in the TM world should Italy be threatened. Rome also has a cult of strenght, with contempt towards subject peoples that didn't assimilate, and generally a heavy xenophobia. Anti-Hellenism (see below) is perhaps most widespread in Rome, with frequent pogroms of Greek merchants. Speaking of merchants, the Romans here are decidedly anti-mercantile, albeit out of pragmaticism the Senate still encourages external trade.
Cultural ascetism that has developed as a part of the Roman militarism has dealt no small damage to the cultural development, albeit it never was specifically imposed. Generally, Rome is beginning to look more and more like pre-Mydilos Sparta.
Greed and Piety: Dacia.
Entirely unlike Rome, Dacia is a mercantile nation. Trade was its foundation; the kingdom of Dacia itself in part appeared to protect the trade interests of Dacian tribes. Dacian merchants from the "Big Three" (Sarmisegetuza, Burebistatuza, Orolestatuza) cities are the driving force behind Balkan commerce, and play no small part in Black Sea and Adriatic trade neither. Dacia is particularily interesting because, due to its trade links, it has gotten very tolerant. Apart from a grudge with Byzantium and a paranoia towards the northern (Germanic) barbarians, Dacia has, if not good, then at least workable relations will all TM powers. This tolerance has made Dacia particularily appealing for Greeks (see below), who assisted it in climbing out of stagnation.
As a sideffect of the tolerance and of trade, Dacia has integrated cultural elements from other nearby nations, especially Luca and Illyria. This is especially visible in Dacian cuisine, which already was quite original. In combination with culinary traditions of their neighbours, this cuisine has evolved into perhaps the most rich in the world, and definitely the richest in the TM. Dacian chefs serve the ruling elites of all nations of the TM.
But, strange as it might seem, trade isn't everything for Dacia. Religion plays a fairly large part in the Dacian lives as well. Dacian Duotheism is combined with a king cult, and the high priest serves as the primary advisor to the king, not to mention the sucessor in the event of a lack of any heirs. Religion plays a much more important role in Dacia than anywhere else in TM.
Thus, most of the world tends to perceive your average Dacian as pious, yet greedy.
Powderkeg: Free Illyria.
The child of the Illyrian War, Republic of Free Illyria was and is a Dacian vassal. The people know it... and are bitterly divided over how to react to it. Polarization, political, economical and cultural, has taken place, and Free Illyria is tumbling towards a civil war.
Much like any other country, Free Illyria is divided into the world of the cities and the world of the villages, the citizens and the peasants. But the division here is along different lines. Whilst most peasants are neutral or support Dacia out of conservatism, they are also the ones that assimilated the least, and roughly 25% of the peasants belong to the anti-Dacian party. The administrative incompetence of the vassal government made them do so. On the other hand, the urban population is divided as well - whilst the oft-Duotheist southerners preffer status quo or, more likely, closer integration with Dacia, perhaps to the point of joining the two states into one, the northerners are bitterly anti-Dacian, often on romantic grounds of patriotism but also on economical grounds of raising tariffs on trade with Dacia and realigning trade towards Rome in part and towards home in other. They seek, above all, the restoration of a fully independant Illyria.
The ideological division between pro-Dacians and anti-Dacians has separated families, has damaged trade and is likely to soon spill out into something bloody soon. It has left no element of Illyrian culture untouched. And there can be no compromise now. The anti-Dacians are especially ruthless, and their xenophobia is much more fargone than that of, say, Rome. Anti-Hellenistic pogroms are widespread, and indeed most foreigners don't dare enter this country outside of Burebistatuza and the fortified path from there to Dacia Proper.
And what of the government itself? Well... It is incompetent. It is rapidly losing power to local governors and feudals, and they are even worse than the government officials. Corruption and weakness that are indivisible from the current government are loathed by both sides. A showdown is required.
The War of Gods: Byzantium.
Byzantium was, from the start, a multiethnic empire. Trojan refugees/colonists and local Thracians made up the original elite of the state, but Macedonians, Epyriots and eventually Greeks were ruled by the emperors as well. Peloponessian Greeks, or Spartans, were especially hard to integrate - they constantly rebelled, and even today most Spartans are more aligned towards Rome (or, prefferably, pro-Roman independance) than towards Byzantium. However, those Spartans were only the most obvious case. Macedonians, for instance, were no easier prey. Subjugated and often enserfed, they often enough launched small-scale revolts, and the poorest of Macedonians abandoned their fields and became bandits, attacking mostly Byzantine merchants and civil officials.
Cultural assimilation was the most obvious answer to these problems, perhaps, but it did not work enough at first. Indeed, Byzantium, in spite of most of its people being of essentially the same religion, only suffered from that - for Greek polytheism was increasingly divided into sects, often along national lines. It was during the reign of Eram V, some 100 years ago, that the Byzantine ruling elite, in the wake of the GTW and ensuing instability, decided that a new religion was needed - a one that will, like the Carthaginian one (see below), be BASED on patriotism and national duty. They took it one step further - they deified Eram I, and made all other emperors Demigods. Slowly, steadily, this religion was propagandized and made widespread. However, unlike in Carthage, the Byzantines didn't bother to include the old gods; albeit they were not explicitly forbidden, they were effectively "demoted". Needless to say, this, albeit bringing Thracians and Trojans even closer together, caused large problems outside of the northeast of Byzantium. Epyriots, Macedonians, Spartans, other Greeks - all of them turned to the old religion in even larger amounts than before. If earlier, these peoples were comparatively secular, now religion became the predominant issue. Just as the Byzantine Empire Cult united the loyalists, old Greek Polytheism united the rebels. Much like in Free Illyria, political disagreements affetceted the cultural sphere, but to an even greater degree due to religion becoming the primary issue.
And, just like in Free Illyria, a showdown is neccessary for Byzantium - or, at least, the Balkan region - to progress in any path. Unless, ofcourse, a new attempt of compromise is undertaken...
Blood and Empire: Carthage.
From the days of Hannibal Barcelona, Carthaginian ideology of Imperial Punicism (or Punic Empire Cult) was and remains the cornerstone of Carthaginian culture as a whole. And here, under Carthaginian, we mean Imperial Carthaginian, not just citizens of Carthage or Carthage-Phoeniceans. Celtiberians, Berbers, Gauls, Ligurians... indeed, nearly all of the people living in the Punic Empire of Carthage are considered Punic, even some of Greeks.
The disparate elements of Carthaginian society, both ethnically and economically different from the others, are all united by the Punic Empire Cult, which, unlike the Byzantine one, still does recognize and worship the old gods; its just that now, they are irrevocably tied to Carthage. Thus, rather than divide, the Empire Cult unites.
It is a matter of great irony that, while Rome's theoretically more egalitarian ideology has produced a xenophobic culture, the theoretically xenophobic culture of Carthage has produced a somewhat tolerant society. Greeks, for instance, are tolerated, even though they have to pay a special tax. The Carthaginians have adopted many ideas from Greeks, Celtiberians, Berbers and even Dacians (with whom they maintain trade links and whose famous chefs are constantly employed by the imperial family). They didn't copy blindly; rather, they assimilated and integrated those things that went along with the Imperial Punic doctrine. Carthaginians, in contrast to Romans, are also very extravagant and "cheerful", encouraging arts, especially architecture and sculpture. On the other hand, one must note that Carthage has, over time, developed an unofficial caste system; this was created by the need to maintain their strenght in spite of rising competition. Warriors and sailors are much less tolerant than the others; indeed, they are often as ascetic as Romans. The estrangement of warriors from the ruling elite was already the cause of a civil war, and if this were to progress further, a new such war might come. The priests are also increasingly "worldly" and integrated with the ruling elite. The merchants are, naturally, the most tolerant - but this also brings problems of them being the least protected from sedition.
Carthage is a strong empire, and as long as it remains stable and, if at war, triumphant, it is unlikely to face many problems with the social differences any time soon; as said before, the Empire Cult allows the Empire to maintain cohersion. But if defeat were to come...
Phoenix Rising: Egypt.
Egypt, too, has an Empire Cult, and it is the least different from its traditional religion as Empire Cults go. Indeed, a Pharaoh always was a god, so there was no need to further deify the ruler of Egypt. All that has changed was the addition of a Carthaginian-style patriotic work ethic and the racial theory that, all-in-all, was really the formalization of the old Egyptian ideology and nothing more. The old gods are still revered.
However, in recent times, sun worship gradually became the most important element of Egyptian religion. Not officially yet - but Aton is becoming increasingly close to heading the Pantheon. There are many factors, such as pharaonical patronage, but let us concentrate on its symbolical importance - for the phoenix, a mythical bird that dies to be reborn, is associated with sun worship. And for Egypt, which has like no other empire experienced the cycles of rise and fall, the phoenix is the most obvious state symbol. Egypt was an empire once, a great and powerful empire that was brought down by rebels; but now, it rose again. Just like the phoenix, it only dies to be reborn.
This cyclism and persistance has resulted in a society that can survive great shocks, confident that good times will come again. But the people of Egypt are also constantly reminded that just by waiting for things to get better, they won't achieve anything. Ramses V, just like his predecessors, constantly works to strengthen the empire. Due to the difficulties facing it two centuries ago, Egypt had to tone down its xenophobia and arrogance to a certain degree, and to invite foreign (mostly Lucan and Greek (the latter was an especially tough choice, as the Greeks, not without reasons, are held responsible for the old Civil War), but also Carthaginian) specialists to reform the state and the army, to re-invigorate commerce and to build up a strong new fleet. Egypt, albeit still fairly conservative socially, has crash-modernized and reformed itself into the regional power it is today, and reforms did not yet cease.
Egypt is on the rise, and the people are confident that even if it falls, it will once more rise from the ashes.
das
Regeneration In Process
We Will Rise Again: Luca.
In spite of Khorvash' reforms, in spite of certain reconquests during the Syrian War, Luca still faces the old inferiority complex and identity crisis that has plagued it since Luca lost hegemony and much of its empire in the Middle East to Bactrasha and rebels. To put it simply, the Lucans are still revanchist. Long dead are those people who actually REMEMBERED the old empire, and the system has been greatly changed, reformed into a de facto absolute monarchy, but all this scarcely changed the fact that most Lucans regard Bactrashans as an Enemy, nothing more, nothing less. There can be no compromise with the Enemy or with their lackeys, nor can there be trade with them, or any peaceful co-existance with them. No, peace with the Enemy is merely to give time for new armies to be amassed, new armies that will then once more be sent into the breach. Revanchism is the predominant trait of Lucan society now.
One other thing that is very notable about Lucan society is that, even though the Halabani faith did catch on, it (the society, not the fate) still is very secular. The church is separated from the state in all but in name, and education is under state control or patronage. Naturally, the Lucans are NOT atheist - but they are fairly secular, and this made them vulnerable to missionary efforts, as well as a welcome haven for Greeks (when Lucans overcome their historic hatred of Sparta, ofcourse).
Luca's current identity crisis can only be resolved by a victorious war, or by Luca's utter destruction.
Resistance Is Futile: Bactrasha.
Ever since the Aranian tribes were suddenly propelled to greatness and predominance of the Middle East, they had many problems adjusting to their new role. Largely out of fear that they would be overthrown or assimilated by the Parhaens, and wishing to overcome the vast diversity of ethnicities within their new empire, the Bactrashan rulers worked tirelessly to transform their multiethnic and multicultural empire into something altogether new. And in this, they succeeded, for the most part. Mithraism was adopted as the official imperial religion, and the more admirable (from Bactrashan viewpoint) elements of different cultures were mixed into the new imperial one. Thus, what appeared in the end was a tolerant, yet imperialistic, stable, yet warlike society. Bactrashans of all nationalities grew up keeping both their national identity and the imperial one, being taught from their youth that these were inseparable. Sure, it did not always work, and even in the previous century there still were occasional rebellions, and even now there are discontent religious groups, especially in Western Assyria. But in general, an unexpectedly stable empire has emerged, with a productive and comparatively egalitarian society (warriors and merchants being the predominant classes, with ).
Internally-stable, that is. Externally, Bactrasha is feared and hated by all of its neighbours for its generally arrogant foreign policies. Not even the Syrian War changed the simple fact that, as far as most of the Bactrashans care, they are the Hegemon, the greatest empire in the world. All others according to the imperialistic Bactrashan philosophy are either vassals, either enemies. Shall we add that nobody wants to be classed as the former? Indeed, the Bactrashan government has occasionally tried to be more "friendly" to those around itself, but this never bore much fruit apart from the temporary alliance with Egypt during the Syrian War - Bactrasha is, as said before, feared and hated, not to mention that much of its elite, as represented in the sabha, can't stand two-sided cooperation with foreign powers. But that said, Bactrasha is not neccessarily xenophobic; albeit it does treat other cultures with arrogance, the same imperialistic philosophy that rules the hearts and minds of most Bactrashans does not emphasize conquest for subjugation; rather, there is a concept of a "Bactrashan's Burden" to civilize and assimilate everybody around them, to bring the enlightened Bactrashan culture (which isn't too much of a delusion, to be fair) to those barbarians around themselves. That is considered the divine duty given by Mithra to his chosen empire.
The motto of Bactrashan foreign political philosophy could be phrased as "Resistance is futile, you will be assimilated" (ripoff intended).
Tamed Desert: Israel.
Most people in the world still perceive Israel as a desert barren land without cities, where blood-crazed religious fanatics have wiped out most other people and are still brooding over their failure to expand further north in the Syrian War. Nothing could be further from truth. Israel was once a nation of zealous warriors, but since then, it became more tame, in part under Phoenicean influence and in part due to the lack of obvious enemies, apart from perhaps Egypt - a historical and economical enemy. For, indeed, Israel is now a nation of merchants. Incense and myrrh are exported from Israel all over the world, from Khmeria to Carthage, but Israel's role of the middleman was weakened by no other nation but Egypt, which used the newly-built Canal to effectively steal that aforementioned middleman position between India and TM basin.
But, really, Israel is now a peaceful nation. Warriors and even priests are de facto losing much of their importance to the merchants, who also frequently fall prey to foreign influences. This is the primary crisis of Israel - the nomads, the peasants, the warriors and the priests on the conservative side are pitted against the merchants and the citizens on the liberal side. There was no civil war yet, but this bitter antagonism is gradually grinding away at the Israeli society. It is unclear as to what should be done about it at all.
Israel, ever since the Syrian War, has lived in peace. But perhaps, a war that is even worse then any others will soon happen there - a war where brothers is pitted against brother, where son fights father. And if the Warriors win, then Israel might once more turn to the zealot tradition of the old...
Two Diasporas: Greeks.
It was already said that various TM nations have few things in common. Few - but some things they do indeed share, and primarily, that is the Greeks. There is no coastal city, not to mention trade center in either of the seas without a Greek community.
All Greeks could be divided into two groups - Megalans and Spartans, by the place of origin from where they subsequently fled. Ofcourse, there are also those Greeks who remained in, well, Greece - but they are a different group. The Greeks that we are talking about are the "Diasporid" ones. They have some common traits - they are, in their fields of expertise, great experts, and hate either Romans (Megalans), either Byzantines (Spartans). And all peoples regard them with a certain degree of mistrust or even hatred, that is translated into anti-Hellenism. Anti-Hellenist mobs, especially in Rome and Egypt, frequently commit pogroms in Greek (Megalan, really - who will dare to attack Spartans?!) communities, and anti-Hellenist demagogues, who often have the ears of the powerful of the world, speak of an international Hellenist conspiracy.
That, and religious-linguistical similarities, was pretty much all that the two groups had in common. Megalans regard Spartans as too conservative and "idealistic", whilst Spartans regard Megalans as accommodationist mercantilists.
Megalans could be best compared with OTL's Jews, but are still fairly different in that they are, theoretically anyway, democratic and liberal. Megalan Greek philosophers have provided the ideology for both the Roman Republic (ironic, no?) and the Guzite movement in Egypt. Their liberalism, however, was strangely traditionalist; Greeks clinged on to their religion and culture, and opposed any attempts of assimilation. Indeed, Greeks continued to treat everybody else as barbarians, and this arrogance resulted in a large growth of anti-Hellenism. Another reason was the fact that Megalans have commited themselves to commerce and thus gained much experience in it; they thus are, for the most part, merchants, or money-lenders, or (proto-) bankers, and are rich - that makes the poorer "barbarians" jealous and incites even more anti-Hellenism. Generally, however, rulers tend to (grudgingly or not) allow or even encourage Megalan activities, especially in Dacia and Carthage. For all of their (often-real) greed, the Megalans are an excellent driving force for commerce and are recognized as such by most rulers. Indeed, Dacia is perhaps the best-off in that regard. Already mercantile and fairly tolerant, Dacia thus is likely to enter a new era of prosperity as Megalans flock to Burebistatuza. Some Megalan Greeks also act as political and economic advisors and civil officials to those governments that will accept them; albeit they are rarely popular, they tend to be fairly competent.
Spartans, meanwhile, can perhaps be compared with OTL's White Russian emigres (not to be confused with Belarusians), but also have elements of OTL Vikings (the mercenary ones) or 18th-19th century Germans (again, mercenaries and military advisors). They all are descendants of refugees who fled from the Byzantine oppression, and they maitain their ancient military tradition. They are, de facto, nomads - that is, most Spartans travel in "companies", seeking employment. Others act as military advisors, and were in fact the cornerstone behind Egyptian military reforms (Pharaoh Ramses IV invited hundreds of Spartans, in spite of popular protests, to help him rebuild his army for the reconquest of lost lands). It is rumored that Spartans have some sort of a central organization, but that is unlikely; more plausible is the theory that they have a very large and decentralized guild that helps them find employment and generally allows for minimal amounts of coordination. Military advisors however are mostly freelance. Regardless, all Spartans have a certain code of honour, according to which they do their best to avoid fighting each other and refuse to work for the Byzantines (there are always exceptions, but most Spartans still hate Byzantium). At first, those mercenary groups (formed by the survivors of the many Spartan rebellions during the last three centuries) were intended as a temporary employment until Sparta could be freed again, with the money and experience, and maybe allies, gathered for the cause. But by now, this has turned into more of a way of life, though there still are some people who want to change that. Anyway, Spartan mercenaries, albeit they rarely agree to attack other Spartans, are in all other cases more then worth the price, whilst Spartan military advisors are capable of turning any army into a powerhouse within less then a decade. Ofcourse, anti-Hellenism is a major deterrent (officers and nobles generally embrace anti-Spartan anti-Hellenism especially), as is the damage caused by any such agreements to the relations with Byzantium. But this has not prevented Egyptian, and to a lesser extent Carthaginian and some other, usage of Spartan services.
In spite of Khorvash' reforms, in spite of certain reconquests during the Syrian War, Luca still faces the old inferiority complex and identity crisis that has plagued it since Luca lost hegemony and much of its empire in the Middle East to Bactrasha and rebels. To put it simply, the Lucans are still revanchist. Long dead are those people who actually REMEMBERED the old empire, and the system has been greatly changed, reformed into a de facto absolute monarchy, but all this scarcely changed the fact that most Lucans regard Bactrashans as an Enemy, nothing more, nothing less. There can be no compromise with the Enemy or with their lackeys, nor can there be trade with them, or any peaceful co-existance with them. No, peace with the Enemy is merely to give time for new armies to be amassed, new armies that will then once more be sent into the breach. Revanchism is the predominant trait of Lucan society now.
One other thing that is very notable about Lucan society is that, even though the Halabani faith did catch on, it (the society, not the fate) still is very secular. The church is separated from the state in all but in name, and education is under state control or patronage. Naturally, the Lucans are NOT atheist - but they are fairly secular, and this made them vulnerable to missionary efforts, as well as a welcome haven for Greeks (when Lucans overcome their historic hatred of Sparta, ofcourse).
Luca's current identity crisis can only be resolved by a victorious war, or by Luca's utter destruction.
Resistance Is Futile: Bactrasha.
Ever since the Aranian tribes were suddenly propelled to greatness and predominance of the Middle East, they had many problems adjusting to their new role. Largely out of fear that they would be overthrown or assimilated by the Parhaens, and wishing to overcome the vast diversity of ethnicities within their new empire, the Bactrashan rulers worked tirelessly to transform their multiethnic and multicultural empire into something altogether new. And in this, they succeeded, for the most part. Mithraism was adopted as the official imperial religion, and the more admirable (from Bactrashan viewpoint) elements of different cultures were mixed into the new imperial one. Thus, what appeared in the end was a tolerant, yet imperialistic, stable, yet warlike society. Bactrashans of all nationalities grew up keeping both their national identity and the imperial one, being taught from their youth that these were inseparable. Sure, it did not always work, and even in the previous century there still were occasional rebellions, and even now there are discontent religious groups, especially in Western Assyria. But in general, an unexpectedly stable empire has emerged, with a productive and comparatively egalitarian society (warriors and merchants being the predominant classes, with ).
Internally-stable, that is. Externally, Bactrasha is feared and hated by all of its neighbours for its generally arrogant foreign policies. Not even the Syrian War changed the simple fact that, as far as most of the Bactrashans care, they are the Hegemon, the greatest empire in the world. All others according to the imperialistic Bactrashan philosophy are either vassals, either enemies. Shall we add that nobody wants to be classed as the former? Indeed, the Bactrashan government has occasionally tried to be more "friendly" to those around itself, but this never bore much fruit apart from the temporary alliance with Egypt during the Syrian War - Bactrasha is, as said before, feared and hated, not to mention that much of its elite, as represented in the sabha, can't stand two-sided cooperation with foreign powers. But that said, Bactrasha is not neccessarily xenophobic; albeit it does treat other cultures with arrogance, the same imperialistic philosophy that rules the hearts and minds of most Bactrashans does not emphasize conquest for subjugation; rather, there is a concept of a "Bactrashan's Burden" to civilize and assimilate everybody around them, to bring the enlightened Bactrashan culture (which isn't too much of a delusion, to be fair) to those barbarians around themselves. That is considered the divine duty given by Mithra to his chosen empire.
The motto of Bactrashan foreign political philosophy could be phrased as "Resistance is futile, you will be assimilated" (ripoff intended).
Tamed Desert: Israel.
Most people in the world still perceive Israel as a desert barren land without cities, where blood-crazed religious fanatics have wiped out most other people and are still brooding over their failure to expand further north in the Syrian War. Nothing could be further from truth. Israel was once a nation of zealous warriors, but since then, it became more tame, in part under Phoenicean influence and in part due to the lack of obvious enemies, apart from perhaps Egypt - a historical and economical enemy. For, indeed, Israel is now a nation of merchants. Incense and myrrh are exported from Israel all over the world, from Khmeria to Carthage, but Israel's role of the middleman was weakened by no other nation but Egypt, which used the newly-built Canal to effectively steal that aforementioned middleman position between India and TM basin.
But, really, Israel is now a peaceful nation. Warriors and even priests are de facto losing much of their importance to the merchants, who also frequently fall prey to foreign influences. This is the primary crisis of Israel - the nomads, the peasants, the warriors and the priests on the conservative side are pitted against the merchants and the citizens on the liberal side. There was no civil war yet, but this bitter antagonism is gradually grinding away at the Israeli society. It is unclear as to what should be done about it at all.
Israel, ever since the Syrian War, has lived in peace. But perhaps, a war that is even worse then any others will soon happen there - a war where brothers is pitted against brother, where son fights father. And if the Warriors win, then Israel might once more turn to the zealot tradition of the old...
Two Diasporas: Greeks.
It was already said that various TM nations have few things in common. Few - but some things they do indeed share, and primarily, that is the Greeks. There is no coastal city, not to mention trade center in either of the seas without a Greek community.
All Greeks could be divided into two groups - Megalans and Spartans, by the place of origin from where they subsequently fled. Ofcourse, there are also those Greeks who remained in, well, Greece - but they are a different group. The Greeks that we are talking about are the "Diasporid" ones. They have some common traits - they are, in their fields of expertise, great experts, and hate either Romans (Megalans), either Byzantines (Spartans). And all peoples regard them with a certain degree of mistrust or even hatred, that is translated into anti-Hellenism. Anti-Hellenist mobs, especially in Rome and Egypt, frequently commit pogroms in Greek (Megalan, really - who will dare to attack Spartans?!) communities, and anti-Hellenist demagogues, who often have the ears of the powerful of the world, speak of an international Hellenist conspiracy.
That, and religious-linguistical similarities, was pretty much all that the two groups had in common. Megalans regard Spartans as too conservative and "idealistic", whilst Spartans regard Megalans as accommodationist mercantilists.
Megalans could be best compared with OTL's Jews, but are still fairly different in that they are, theoretically anyway, democratic and liberal. Megalan Greek philosophers have provided the ideology for both the Roman Republic (ironic, no?) and the Guzite movement in Egypt. Their liberalism, however, was strangely traditionalist; Greeks clinged on to their religion and culture, and opposed any attempts of assimilation. Indeed, Greeks continued to treat everybody else as barbarians, and this arrogance resulted in a large growth of anti-Hellenism. Another reason was the fact that Megalans have commited themselves to commerce and thus gained much experience in it; they thus are, for the most part, merchants, or money-lenders, or (proto-) bankers, and are rich - that makes the poorer "barbarians" jealous and incites even more anti-Hellenism. Generally, however, rulers tend to (grudgingly or not) allow or even encourage Megalan activities, especially in Dacia and Carthage. For all of their (often-real) greed, the Megalans are an excellent driving force for commerce and are recognized as such by most rulers. Indeed, Dacia is perhaps the best-off in that regard. Already mercantile and fairly tolerant, Dacia thus is likely to enter a new era of prosperity as Megalans flock to Burebistatuza. Some Megalan Greeks also act as political and economic advisors and civil officials to those governments that will accept them; albeit they are rarely popular, they tend to be fairly competent.
Spartans, meanwhile, can perhaps be compared with OTL's White Russian emigres (not to be confused with Belarusians), but also have elements of OTL Vikings (the mercenary ones) or 18th-19th century Germans (again, mercenaries and military advisors). They all are descendants of refugees who fled from the Byzantine oppression, and they maitain their ancient military tradition. They are, de facto, nomads - that is, most Spartans travel in "companies", seeking employment. Others act as military advisors, and were in fact the cornerstone behind Egyptian military reforms (Pharaoh Ramses IV invited hundreds of Spartans, in spite of popular protests, to help him rebuild his army for the reconquest of lost lands). It is rumored that Spartans have some sort of a central organization, but that is unlikely; more plausible is the theory that they have a very large and decentralized guild that helps them find employment and generally allows for minimal amounts of coordination. Military advisors however are mostly freelance. Regardless, all Spartans have a certain code of honour, according to which they do their best to avoid fighting each other and refuse to work for the Byzantines (there are always exceptions, but most Spartans still hate Byzantium). At first, those mercenary groups (formed by the survivors of the many Spartan rebellions during the last three centuries) were intended as a temporary employment until Sparta could be freed again, with the money and experience, and maybe allies, gathered for the cause. But by now, this has turned into more of a way of life, though there still are some people who want to change that. Anyway, Spartan mercenaries, albeit they rarely agree to attack other Spartans, are in all other cases more then worth the price, whilst Spartan military advisors are capable of turning any army into a powerhouse within less then a decade. Ofcourse, anti-Hellenism is a major deterrent (officers and nobles generally embrace anti-Spartan anti-Hellenism especially), as is the damage caused by any such agreements to the relations with Byzantium. But this has not prevented Egyptian, and to a lesser extent Carthaginian and some other, usage of Spartan services.
Insane_Panda
Deity
Awesome stuff Das. Now to reform Armorica!
alex994
Hail Divine Emperor!
Now if you das will grace us with something similar but about east asia instead...
North King
blech
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2004
- Messages
- 18,165
Yeah, the west is boring.
Sheep
Orange Shrooms!
Exactly the west is the most exciting.
Symphony D.
Deity
The East is only "boring" because unlike the West, we have the good sense to not perpetually beat on one another and acknowledge (to varying degrees) the spheres of influence of our neighbors, only attacking when really necessary.
Which is why virtually every Eastern nation is a major power, while most Western ones are not much bigger than they were last IT.
The real snoozes are those stone age Native Americans.
Which is why virtually every Eastern nation is a major power, while most Western ones are not much bigger than they were last IT.
The real snoozes are those stone age Native Americans.
Sheep
Orange Shrooms!
He is correct however the problem is that certain peoples do not acknowledge the asendecy of Carthage and its imperial duty to ensure its security. The original aims of Hannibal Barcelona were to ensure the security of the Empire, it led to the conquest of two nations and displacement of thousands of enemy civilians, and the utter collapse of a thrid enemy only to be spared and given a second chance.
Carthage preaches peace but will not hesitate to protect itself including pre-emptivley if need be.
Carthage preaches peace but will not hesitate to protect itself including pre-emptivley if need be.
Similar threads
- user746383
- Civ7 - General Discussions
