|
Post by Sojourner on Jul 29, 2004 1:51:04 GMT -5
The Imperium in the sense of the product of the Great Crusade, or the pre-Emperor domains founded during the Stellar Exodus?
Something of both, I suppose, but it would be interesting to see which we consider to be more important.
|
|
|
Post by Kage2020 on Jul 29, 2004 2:53:52 GMT -5
The principle of cultural homeostasis suggests that it is going to be both, so no surprise there. That is to say that the 'Great Crusade culture' will interact with what you term pre-GC domains (or what I still think of as micro-empires, for some inappropriate reason )... If we consider the origins of the Imperium, the Emperor reunited the 'warring' (ahem) warlords of Terra during the Age of Strife. You've therefore got a substantial warrior culture which, both in wargame logic and quite reasonably, you remobilise into your armed forces. It is also one that is aspected around distinct personalities, e.g. a 'nobility' of forms. Thus I would not find it surprising that this autocracy is perpetuated into the Imperim and, thus, my utilisation of the nobilitas imperilias. That is to say former warlord/dictators in control of territories on Terra which were integrated (through military or political action) into the pre-GC 'culture' that would be the basis of the Imperium... However, substantial remobilising of defunct infrastructure would also have been required, including rebuilding of the cities (i.e. we're not entirely working on Mad Max imagery with all those deserts! ). This requires moving not insignificant chunks of the population into the manufacturing sector, as well as maintaining the minimum (ish) required to actually feed this population. (We have to remember that Terra, at this point, is a closed system...) Arguably this is part of the basis of the adeptus terra. ... I'm still fixating upon the nobility concept since it just seems to make sense (to me! ) based upon what we know of the subsequent Imperium... We also have the potential for the 'citizen' and 'non-citizen' approach, i.e. those that were involved in the creation, support and prosecution of the GC are the 'citizens' while all the others are non-citizens... Okay, I'm talking now to stop myself from having to continue to transcribe this darned will... Darned 18th century handwriting!
|
|
|
Post by Sojourner on Jul 29, 2004 6:01:51 GMT -5
The tribal culture of Pre-Primarch Earth would certainly be ideal for roping in as your leadership system, but I doubt they'd be terribly useful to a more advanced, ordered system of government and military organisation.
Still, I don't doubt that they had a not-insignificant influence on the cultures they conquered once the Crusade got underway. Though, the conquering forces were numerically small and didn't stick around, so I imagine a great deal of the Exodus-era traditions would remain. Perhaps the Crusading forces were responsible for much of the anarchy prevalent on many worlds of the Imperium (regression to feral states and so on...). March in, threaten the government, kill them, destroy their infrastructure and install a weak puppet rulership in their place. Real progressive like - and likely to collapse shortly after the Imperial forces leave.
|
|
|
Post by orangesm on Jul 29, 2004 10:19:36 GMT -5
I suppose that my last comment was a counter example to the first one. But I suppose that is due to the fact that I agree in the existance of an Imperial Nobility. It is made up of the Hive World Elite, Civilised Rich and Nobility, and possibly even the Nobility of some of the less advanced worlds. These individuals sons and daughters are trained to serve the Imperium as Imperial Guard and Navy Staff Officers (eventually rising to be Generals themselves) as well as normal naval officers, they become the Priest of the Imperial Church, and other Adeptus Adminstratum positions (eventually the Governors of worlds I suppose), even Inquistors. So in effect they bring the culture of their homeworld, adopt the culture of Schola/Academy they went to, and then influence just a little the organization they become part of. So taking from the Roman example it would be like a Roman Soldier from Britain, with British parents, rising to become a high ranking Roman Officer and eventual making to Rome or just rising in Britian to a place of Power in the Roman Adminstration.
|
|
|
Post by Kage2020 on Jul 29, 2004 11:42:50 GMT -5
That's kind of the point, though. The above preliminary thought creates a two-tiered system predicated upon a militant nobility and a non-militant 'support'. I would presume that the 'support' side of things would be sufficiently altered following the required severe amount of education into the various organisations which themselves would become the adeptus terra.
Well, there is of course a significant difference between conquering someone and imposing a culture. Furthermore the 'wave theory' for the Great Crusade also goes someway to explaining this... But that is very definitely an aside for the moment.
While not impossible, I would say that it is unlikely. Remembering that the Age of Strife was attributed to the Iron Man debacle and the emergence of psykers...
Given the general tendency of the Imperium to tray and protect the infrastructure, I wouldn't agree with this...
That, for me, is the nobility of the Imperium but one that is significalty different to the Imperium nobility (i.e. ]nobilitas imperialis).
This would be consistent with the 'fluff'.
Now this is where I question the image that your putting forward. Remember, for examle, the Guard and the adeptus arbites. It has been mentioned that, just as with the Roman legions, the government doesn't like to post people to their homeworlds... The implication here is either one of segregation (which I'm kind of favouring since it also conforms to the concept of a 'parasitic organisation') or one in which significant proportions of the Imperium population must shift around. (And that's relatively significant... in the grand scheme of things, as it were.)
But that's a significantly different situation than we're dealing with here, surely?
And don't forget that as one moved further away from Rome and the 'centre' of things, the chances of a non-Roman (at least in the beginning) rising through the ranks was exceptionally rare. Indeed, one of the points for the 'fall' of Rome was in the expansion of the concept of citizenship (here I would say that is more applicable to the nobility, though)...
|
|