|
Squalid posted:eh. . . tbh never ending succession problems is really more the norm of history rather than the exception. I mean the Achaemenid Empire falls into civil war within a decade of the death of Cyrus the Great, and the Qin Empire immediately fell into disorder after Qin Shi Huang's death. The Ottoman Empire was barely less vulnerable to succession disputes than Rome. In much of the world succession is still a moment of acute crisis, with mass violence at risk of breaking out if the stage managers botch the process. Seems like the majority of great leaders have their empires fall apart the minute they die.
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2018 08:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 12, 2024 17:48 |
|
|
Koramei posted:For the Chinese stuff, not off the top of my head no. Thanks!
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2018 10:55
|
|
Not beyond what I mentioned; the hunting culture and a lot of ceremonial dress for instance. But I'd really recommend Empire's Twilight if you're interested, it goes into this a bunch. I expect (for all of this) there's a lot more though than we know today; Chinese historians past and present mostly haven't been keen to dig into what parts of their culture are foreign, so a lot of it got lost or takes a lot of digging.
|
Epicurius posted:See the White Rajahs of Sarawak... Interesting stuff, hadn't heard about them before.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2018 10:57
|
|
|
SlothfulCobra posted:Before the onset of democracy in most of Europe, the old monarchies basically tried to solve the eternal succession issue by getting super anal about family trees so there's always an heir apparent...
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2018 13:20
|
|
|
HEY GUNS posted:not in the HRE, it was only dominated by Hapsburgs for so long basically out of coincidence:. How does one family control an empire for 300 years coincidentally? After the fourth or fifth time in a row, you start suspecting the game is rigged.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2018 15:29
|
|
|
Epicurius posted:How does one family control an empire for 300 years coincidentally? After the fourth or fifth time in a row, you start suspecting the game is rigged.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2018 15:31
|
|
|
and it's nice to have a familiar face on the throne and coins and portraits 
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2018 15:40
|
|
|
Hogge Wild posted:and it's nice to have a familiar face on the throne and coins and portraits
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2018 15:48
|
|
|
Just extend the chin a little for every new generation
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2018 15:56
|
|
|
I mean by the late 16th century the Habsburg name was pretty much more significant than the title of emperor so you'd have to pull a real coup to disassociate them
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2018 15:59
|
|
|
Ras Het posted:I mean by the late 16th century the Habsburg name was pretty much more significant than the title of emperor so you'd have to pull a real coup to disassociate them
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2018 16:08
|
|
|
HEY GUNS posted:maria theresa's husband was the kid of the duke of lorraine ...and?
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2018 16:26
|
|
|
How did Roman persecution of religious minorities compare from its pagan to its Christian periods?
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2018 21:04
|
|
|
Epicurius posted:How does one family control an empire for 300 years coincidentally? After the fourth or fifth time in a row, you start suspecting the game is rigged. The Hapsburg where the last major family standing in the big die out in the 14th and 15th century pretty much.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2018 02:27
|
|
|
Epicurius posted:How does one family control an empire for 300 years coincidentally? Strength in numbers. And good breeding
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2018 13:02
|
|
|
Ras Het posted:...and? edit: and every now and then people float the names of non-Hapsburg candidates, usually as part of a power struggle
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2018 13:08
|
|
|
Yes, because Charles VI had no living sons, hence the pragmatic sanction
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2018 13:17
|
|
|
HEY GUNS posted:she was the hapsburg and the empress of the ahe, but he was the emperor of the hre. you don't have to be a 'burg. Yeah, but the only reason he was considered was because of his relation to the hapsburgs.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2018 14:00
|
|
|
guns for tits posted:How did Roman persecution of religious minorities compare from its pagan to its Christian periods? The pagan imperial Romans gave no shits about your religion as long as you were willing to worship the Emperor alongside your own gods. To the best of my knowledge the only people who had an issue with this were the Jews and also that weird little heretical Jewish cult called 'Christians'.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2018 15:16
|
|
|
China was more Roman than the HRE, none of this elective monarchy nonsense.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2018 15:22
|
|
|
feedmegin posted:The pagan imperial Romans gave no shits about your religion as long as you were willing to worship the Emperor alongside your own gods. To the best of my knowledge the only people who had an issue with this were the Jews and also that weird little heretical Jewish cult called 'Christians'. This isn’t entirely true, there were sporadic fits of persecution towards “barbarian” religions. Self-castration by the cult of Cybele was forbidden though the cult itself was indulged. Augustus expelled the Egyptian cults from the city as an obvious political play, and banned druidical practices, which was probably more of the same.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2018 15:46
|
|
|
I'm still convinced the druids got owned by the Romans because of all the human sacrifice, which Rome really frowned on.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2018 18:03
|
|
|
feedmegin posted:The pagan imperial Romans gave no shits about your religion as long as you were willing to worship the Emperor alongside your own gods. To the best of my knowledge the only people who had an issue with this were the Jews and also that weird little heretical Jewish cult called 'Christians'. If you havent read it, I'd recommend James O'Donnell's "Pagans", which is a look at Roman religion and how the idea of pagans and Roman paganism is a Christian invention.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2018 19:31
|
|
|
There is an In Our Time on that !! https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01mqq94
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2018 19:33
|
|
|
cheetah7071 posted:There's a real argument to be made that the biggest advantage modern western democratic republics have over autocratic rule is just that they encourage peaceful transference of power and provide for the succession (in the form of elections) in their highest laws. There's a realer argument to be made that modern western democratic republics are run by the rich backers of the political leades, and that it therefore doesn't matter who the figureheads are.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2018 20:11
|
|
|
Tias posted:There's a realer argument to be made that modern western democratic republics are run by the rich backers of the political leades, and that it therefore doesn't matter who the figureheads are. It matters to the leaders themselves and I do like that we don't dissolve into civil war every time the figurehead changes
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2018 20:13
|
|
|
Tias posted:There's a realer argument to be made that modern western democratic republics are run by the rich backers of the political leades, and that it therefore doesn't matter who the figureheads are. Agreed, Trump and Obama are exactly the same
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2018 20:16
|
|
|
Tias posted:There's a realer argument to be made that modern western democratic republics are run by the rich backers of the political leades, and that it therefore doesn't matter who the figureheads are. There's also the argument that the world is run by shape-shifting lizard people. It's just as credible as the above these days.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2018 20:24
|
|
|
Kemper Boyd posted:I'm still convinced the druids got owned by the Romans because of all the human sacrifice, which Rome really frowned on. Yet Rome was cool and good with working slaves to death in mines. It’s just a convenient excuse.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2018 20:42
|
|
|
They also performed literal human sacrifice at the height of every Triumph. They didn't call it a sacrifice but they ritualistically executed all the captive who had been paraded around in front of the temple of Jupiter and followed it with a religious ceremony. If that's not human sacrifice in all but name I don't know what is.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2018 20:46
|
|
|
Epicurius posted:If you havent read it, I'd recommend James O'Donnell's "Pagans", which is a look at Roman religion and how the idea of pagans and Roman paganism is a Christian invention. By 'pagan' here I just meant 'not Christian', tbh, nothing more specific than that.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2018 21:07
|
|
|
Kemper Boyd posted:I'm still convinced the druids got owned by the Romans because of all the human sacrifice, which Rome really frowned on. The human sacrifice thing was probably something they kept pointing out when they needed to justify colonizing Britain beyond "they're here but we want their poo poo and they aren't letting us take it"
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2018 21:14
|
|
|
feedmegin posted:By 'pagan' here I just meant 'not Christian', tbh, nothing more specific than that. I know. I'd still recommend the book, though.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2018 21:20
|
|
|
FAUXTON posted:The human sacrifice thing was probably something they kept pointing out when they needed to justify colonizing Britain beyond "they're here but we want their poo poo and they aren't letting us take it"
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2018 21:29
|
|
|
HEY GUNS posted:you didn't have any poo poo, sheesh Tin and slaves are good enough.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2018 21:42
|
|
|
Vincent Van Goatse posted:There's also the argument that the world is run by shape-shifting lizard people. It's just as credible as the above these days. Class interests: basically alien conspiracy theories. Yeah gently caress off. HEY GUNS posted:you didn't have any poo poo, sheesh Tin and plenty of healthy strong people to participate in Rome's unique guest worker programme.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2018 00:26
|
|
|
Teriyaki Hairpiece posted:China was more Roman than the HRE, none of this elective monarchy nonsense. i mean, rome never had a set system of succession anyway, that just sounds like a solid reform
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2018 00:33
|
|
|
Marxist-Jezzinist posted:Class interests: basically alien conspiracy theories. Yeah gently caress off. edit: speaking of presidents, 2016 should have proven to you that the idea there are shadowy figures in charge of the world is a lie. Nobody is in charge. If they were they would have stopped Trump because they would be taking a pasting right now. HEY GUNS fucked around with this message at 00:46 on Dec 22, 2018 |
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2018 00:40
|
|
|
trump hasn't exactly been bad for the 1%
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2018 00:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 12, 2024 17:48 |
|
|
HEY GUNS posted:Tias said the black guy who wants me to get married and the white guy who wants me dead are both figureheads and there's no difference between them. I know where my real interests lie and they aren't with you. Vincent Van Goatse posted:There's also the argument that the world is run by shape-shifting lizard people. It's just as credible as the above these days. Dude you're a loving idiot, I don't follow international politics a whole lot but 100% the backers of both major parties are in charge in Australia. Its incredibly blatantly obvious. Giving mass money to a party and helping them get elected gets you big kickbacks. Rupert Murdoch is a real life lizard person who owns the LNP, our current majority party, and is powerful enough that he has sway with the other major party despite actively working against them. Does that mean the LNP get elected every time? No. But he still owns them. I don't see why this would be different in America where coorporations have more power and bigger pockets and are very publically politically active. Or Europe or any 1st world country. How can you be in a history thread and know and learn about power struggles and politics through history for literally thousands of years and think modern humans are any different. There's always a power behind the throne underage at the vape shop fucked around with this message at 01:41 on Dec 22, 2018 |
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2018 01:37
|
|