Remove ads

The Second Rome: A Quest of Ancient Byzantium

Reader mode
[X] Mikrodrakon
[X] Blessing of Saint Constantine

Changed my vote.
Adhoc vote count started by Parzival95 on Feb 5, 2019 at 5:50 PM, finished with 105 posts and 46 votes.
Click to expand...

Adhoc vote count started by Parzival95 on Feb 5, 2019 at 5:51 PM, finished with 201 posts and 46 votes.
Click to expand...
 
You guys don't need to get so worried about Telamon's warnings. He always warns the players of the worst possible outcomes whenever a vote option get discussed.
 
Oshha said:
You guys don't need to get so worried about Telamon's warnings. He always warns the players of the worst possible outcomes whenever a vote option get discussed.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Fear is the spice of life. :V

I find it motivates them to think more about choices.

EDIT: Plus, I never warn anyone. I just post pertinent historical examples where people in the exact same situation did the exact same thing and it ended horribly.

Any conclusions you draw from that are on you. :drevil:
 
Last edited:
I don't understand why everyone seems to be alright with the idea of having someone who does all of the work of the Emperor while we just fight stuff and act as the face and sword. I'm pretty sure those kind of people are remembered as puppets, and I don't think we want to be remembered like that.
 
Revan Skirata said:
I don't understand why everyone seems to be alright with the idea of having someone who does all of the work of the Emperor while we just fight stuff and act as the face and sword. I'm pretty sure those kind of people are remembered as puppets, and I don't think we want to be remembered like that.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Why are people assuming that we are going to be emperor? It seems like a bold assumption that we are going to seize the Byzantine Empire from one of its more competent and strong rulers (or at least I think we have one of those right now).
 
Oshha said:
one of its more competent and strong rulers (or at least I think we have one of those right now).
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Well...
Called ho Megas (ὁ Μέγας, translated as "the Great") by the Greeks, Manuel is known to have inspired intense loyalty in those who served him. He also appears as the hero of a history written by his secretary, John Kinnamos, in which every virtue is attributed to him. Manuel, who was influenced by his contact with western Crusaders, enjoyed the reputation of "the most blessed emperor of Constantinople" in parts of the Latin world as well.[1]Modern historians, however, have been less enthusiastic about him. Some of them assert that the great power he wielded was not his own personal achievement, but that of the dynasty he represented; they also argue that, since Byzantine imperial power declined catastrophically after Manuel's death, it is only natural to look for the causes of this decline in his reign.[2]
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

In short...kind of.
 
[X] Mikrodrakon
[X] Blessing of Saint Michael

no need to explain this, we need to reconquer the east, the christians in the west will not care if byzantium decides to crusade
 
I would say that if we should fight anyone, we should fight the Holy Roman Empire for daring to call itself three things it isn't.
 
Revan Skirata said:
I would say that if we should fight anyone, we should fight the Holy Roman Empire for daring to call itself three things it isn't.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

The current Holy Roman Emperor is the legendary Frederick Barbarossa:

Historians consider him among the Holy Roman Empire's greatest medieval emperors. He combined qualities that made him appear almost superhuman to his contemporaries: his longevity, his ambition, his extraordinary skills at organization, his battlefield acumen and his political perspicacity. His contributions to Central European society and culture include the reestablishment of the Corpus Juris Civilis, or the Roman rule of law, which counterbalanced the papal power that dominated the German states since the conclusion of the Investiture Controversy.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Also alive at this time is Henry Plantagenet (yes, that Plantagenet), whose Angevin Empire stretches across all of England and France. Anyone seeking to expand westward from Byzantium would have to contend with not one, but two brilliant warrior-emperors in the prime of their lives.

As Wikipedia puts it:

Historians have compared Frederick to Henry II of England. Both were considered the greatest and most charismatic leaders of their age. Each possessed a rare combination of qualities that made him appear superhuman to his contemporaries: longevity, boundless ambition, extraordinary organizing skill, and greatness on the battlefield.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

And should Henry die, his son and heir is Richard the Lionheart. Yes, that Richard the Lionheart.

...man, three powerful, expansionist Christian hero-emperors with legendary charisma and skill, alive at the same time? And then some hack named Saladin has just been born, and a certain Genghis is about to be born...

...it's almost like this is the worst possible time to be an ambitious warlord in one of the most valuable cities in the world, attempting to expand either east or west. :whistle:
 
Last edited:
As for letting our potential wife rule, why not. I don't want to play an idiot. If we're a conquering hero and she's a master of intrigue and administration, I want to be level headed enough to give credit where it's due. She can be the master of the court while we're the master of the battlefield. I wouldn't want arrogance and narcissism get in the way of the good of Byzantium. Let her have her due.

That's assuming we go this route and marry such a woman.
 
Telamon said:
Someone who can amass unlimited soft power and spin webs around you that you can't even understand?

That's not a very good idea: just take a look at the last few times in Roman history someone tried that:

Livia Augusta Drusilla, the first and greatest Roman Empress, was the power behind the throne, and murdered her husband Augustus Caesar (yes, that Augustus Caesar) when he tried to defy her. She murdered his heirs and his other descendants until only her children remained, and her grandson made her a God after her death.

Anna Dalassene, mother to the Emperor Alexios Komnenos. She planned and ensured his rise to the Imperial Throne, then effectively ran the empire while he defended it's borders. She controlled and manipulated him well into his forties, when the Emperor finally overcame her and had her exiled to a nunnery.

Theophano, the 'Scarlet Empress', one of the most infamous woman in Byzantine history. The daughter of a tavern-keeper, she was the lover of three emperors, mother to another two, and murderer of at least one. She killed the Emperor Constantine so his son, her husband Romanos, could gain the throne, then controlled him for his entire reign. After his sudden death (which was attributed to her, though never proven), she married and later murdered the previously-mentioned Emperor Nikephoros Phokas, and through her lover, the Emperor John Tzimiskes, and her sons, the Emperors Basil the Bulgar-Slayer and Constantine VIII, controlled the Byzantine Empire for some thirty-odd years.

Or perhaps the most famous of them all, the Empress and the Saint, Theodora: Wife to Justinian and master of Rome in all but name, she designed laws, orchestrated reforms, and manipulated her husband like a puppet. Priests, generals, magistrates, and kings -- all bowed lower before the Empress than the Emperor. After her death, Justinian's reign spiraled, his conquests slowed, and 'his' famous reforms slowed to a trickle.

A wife who is a capable and shrewd diplomat and intelligencer may just outshine you, and perhaps cast you aside when you are no longer needed. The women of Byzantium are deadly indeed, perhaps moreso than their male counterparts.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I get that you are kind of exaggerating the danger for effect here but god damn seeing the most extreme interpretation for all these figures is a little frustrating for my inner historian. I know you're not doing it on purpose but seeing complex powerful female historical figure being cast as nothing but scheming murdering manipulators is a major pet peeve of mine. Again I'm not angry at you it is just very frustrating to see.
 
Last edited:
My only big thing either way is that we try and make sure any marriage we get into is a real, happy and health one. If she's truly on our side, and as such, we her's, then it should hopefully be fine to let her manage whatever territory we control at home, while we take care of an/the army and frontier. (Not that I'm saying we can't try and grow to handle the other areas still or anything, just that that's an option).

I think the problem is that yes, plenty of instances, overblown for the sake of argument or not, they weren't necessarily a team. That, or people/history only remember them as puppets, rather than it simply being the pair working together but specializing. But that doesn't mean we will necessarily wind up in the same circumstances. It could happen. Hopefully it won't, and our actions will lead to a good partnership or etc, instead of our fears of her trying to use us as a puppet manifesting.
 
masterofmadness said:
I get that you are kind of exaggerating the danger for effect here but god damn seeing the most extreme interpretation for all these figures is a little frustrating for my inner historian. I know your not doing it on purpose but seeing complex powerful female historical figure being cast as nothing but acheming murdering manipulators is a major pet peeve of mine. Again I'm not anger at you it is just very frustrating to see.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

No, no, you're quite right. I was exaggerating greatly for dramatic effect. No situation is free of nuance.

A few notes on my previous claims:

Theophano was maligned and hated by the Imperial court of her time for her low status. The deaths of most every emperor during her lifetime (even the ones she probably couldn't/wouldn't have killed) were attributed to her.

Theodora was a badass, plain and simple. Justinian was more of a paper tiger than anything else. She and Belisarius did all the heavy lifting, and very nearly restored Rome.

Anna Dalassene was incredibly controlling, but she was also a magnificent diplomat and administrator, and the Komnenian Restoration probably got its earliest start in her policies. Most certainly, she was one of the main reasons the Komnenoi took and held the imperial throne.

Livia, um...maybe killed Augustus and definitely murdered her stepdaughter and probably killed or disgraced all of the Julio-Claudians that were not her children/in her favor. But she was incredibly intelligent and powerful, and was at least partially responsible for the establishment of the Roman Empire.
 
Last edited:
Telamon said:
Theodora was a badass, plain and simple. Justinian was more of a paper tiger than anything else. She and Belisarius did all the heavy lifting, and very nearly restored Rome.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Erm...if restoring Rome is burning Italy to the ground below ground, then yeah, they nearly did it. Honestly, if Justinian didn't go off half-cocked, we might still have an Eastern Roman Empire today.
 
Telamon said:
No, no, you're quite right. I was exaggerating greatly for dramatic effect. No situation is free of nuance.

A few notes on my previous claims:

Theophano was maligned and hated by the Imperial court of her time for her low status. The deaths of most every emperor during her lifetime (even the ones she probably couldn't/wouldn't have killed) were attributed to her.

Theodora was a badass, plain and simple. Justinian was more of a paper tiger than anything else. She and Belisarius did all the heavy lifting, and very nearly restored Rome.

Anna Dalassene was incredibly controlling, but she was also a magnificent diplomat and administrator, and the Komnenian Restoration probably got its earliest start in her policies. Most certainly, she was one of the main reasons the Komnenoi took and held the imperial throne.

Livia, um...maybe killed Augustus and definitely murdered her stepdaughter and probably killed or disgraced all of the Julio-Claudians that were not her children/in her favor. But she was incredibly intelligent and powerful, and was at least partially responsible for the establishment of the Roman Empire.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

And most important of all:

They were all, each and every one, leagues upon leagues better than Irene of Freaking Athens.
 
floppy_seal99 said:
Erm...if restoring Rome is burning Italy to the ground below ground, then yeah, they nearly did it. Honestly, if Justinian didn't go off half-cocked, we might still have an Eastern Roman Empire today.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Debatable. The Empire would likely have seen many trials even without the conquests.

Certainly, it's unlikely that Islam would simply have not happened if Justinian had focused on building things up.

And frankly, the extent to which Italy was destroyed was severe, but it's often extremely exaggerated. It wasn't quite as bad as everyone seems to love making it out to be. Just quite bad, instead of LOLevulapocalYpse.
 
[X] Mikrodrakon
[X] Blessing of Saint Constantine

King Tharassian said:
Debatable. The Empire would likely have seen many trials even without the conquests.

Certainly, it's unlikely that Islam would simply have not happened if Justinian had focused on building things up.

And frankly, the extent to which Italy was destroyed was severe, but it's often extremely exaggerated. It wasn't quite as bad as everyone seems to love making it out to be. Just quite bad, instead of LOLevulapocalYpse.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

True. I'm oversimplifying. But I mean that the Empire would have definitely been far more intact if they hadn't just thrown everything away out West.
 
Mikrodrakon [X]
Blessing of Saint Gabriel [X]

This is Rhomania, diplomacy is just as important as pure military force. I'll also note that the real important area to conquer and secure is Central Anatolia up to the Armenian Highlands. The Empire needs a defensible and secure eastern border to shore up its powerbase.
 
Last edited:
@Telamon I just thought of something. In the Roman Republic quest, you made some posts of how we were remembered, usually by book excerpts or quotes from historians. Are you going to do anything like that in this quest?
 
Soverihn said:
Mikrodrakon [X]
Blessing of Saint Gabriel [X]

This is Rhomania, diplomacy is just as important as pure military force. I'll also note that the real important area to conquer and secure is Central Anatolia up to the Armenian Highlands. The Empire needs a defensible and secure eastern border to shore up its powerbase.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Not just this. A certain portion of Western Armenia must be taken and held. Subsequently, a series of buffer states must be put in place in NW Mesopotami and Eastern Armenia. A strong Christian polity must be present and dominant across the Caucasus, holding at minimum, all the land from Sarkel and Ittil in the North to the Aras River in the south.

We need dependable Orthodox and Nestorian allies of all flavors out east, hell, any non-Catholic and non-Muslim allies will work. And we need at least two who could reasonably compete with the White Sheep Turks when taken together.
 
Reader mode
You must login or register to reply here.
Remove ads
Back
Top