This is overstated. Athens eventually allows metics to purchase citizenship, as stated above, once it loses its independence and the distinction between citizens and metics is no longer material.
Once it loses its independence. It gets conquered, it becomes a vassal State, it loses a lot of its importance and it's rights, it's Empire is long gone and it's people have been cowed into a greater Polity.

How is that not equivalent to the near destruction I mention being one of the only ways for it to occur? If we lost all our vassals, were made into a subordinate and no longer dominated the Adriatic Trade, how is that not to the brink of destruction? Quest end.

You literally agreed with my point dude
 
Last edited:
So what's the plan? Prove the metics to be as loyal as the ctitizens, then give them rights piecemeal until citizenship is defacto granted to them?
An interesting alternative approach might be to retain metic status as a thing, but to shape it so that it's part of "path to citizenship" rather than a rigid, inherited class. Because having a semi-citizen status is remarkably useful in this period for handling new members of society from external sources.

EDIT: Which is to say that as a class it continues to exist, but that the population of individuals within that class will shift within or over the course of a few generations.
 
Last edited:
The closest I can see to coming to that would be something like a provision that, say, the child of a citizen and a metic who's been in the city all their lives, as have their parents, is a citizen. Or something like that.

[To clarify, I mean that a third-or-whatever generation metic might be able to marry a citizen and have citizen children or something]
 
Last edited:
Once it loses its independence. It gets conquered, it becomes a vassal State, it loses a lot of its importance and it's rights, it's Empire is long gone and it's people have been cowed into a greater Polity.

How is that not equivalent to the near destruction I mention being one of the only ways for it to occur? If we lost all our vassals, were made into a subordinate and no longer dominated the Adriatic Trade, how is that not to the brink of destruction? Quest end.

You literally agreed with my point dude

I doubt that's the end of the quest. Becoming a Mongol vassal sure wasn't the end of Muscovy, for example.
 
I doubt that's the end of the quest. Becoming a Mongol vassal sure wasn't the end of Muscovy, for example.
You used the example of Athens, which was essentially Quest End for their independent ability to do anything for a while, and I personally used the example of losing all our vassals, including the League, if I didn't make that clear enough, and our dominance over the Adriatic, before being vassalised.

Muscovy didn't lose 90% of its sphere of control and power over its most important trade routes before being vassalised by the Mongols. So you're switching examples, and ignoring the examples I used, to one that really doesn't fit the conversation we've been having.

I feel like you tried to make an argument, without quite reading the point in my original post where I mentioned near destruction, which was what Athens faced before it allowed Metics to buy citizenship. It had lost its Empire, a great deal of its economic dominance and had been reduced in influence by Sparta directly, and then conquered outright. Which is near destruction in my opinion. Even then the Metics had to buy citizenship. And that's not even factoring in cultural differences between us, as I mentioned in my original post, which causes possibly more issues.

Or I didn't make it clear enough what I meant by Near Destruction. In which case I apologise.
 
Last edited:
Actually being Mongol vassal helped Muscovy to rise as they were able to collect taxes from all other principalities.
 
OK, but I think the core point is well taken, inasmuch as Eretria specifically is unlikely to be conquered enough to make citizenship an irrelevant distinction, without first being too conquered for its future government policy to matter much.
 
I think players can probably agree that regardless of the potential effects of being conquered on the game or the benefits for citizenship reform, it is probably not a situation to be aspiring towards.
 
Actually from what I can figure out, ideally we want a system by which the top 1% most influential Metics can reliably become Citizens...and no more than that for this era. The political purpose of granting powerful Metics citizenship is to eliminate Metics who normally would be dissatisfied by the system by making them part of the social class whose privileges are to be protected, and who thus wouldn't rock the boat too hard, instead favoring backdoor favors for the metics who are their friends, rather than pushing for Metic rights as a broader class.
 
Actually from what I can figure out, ideally we want a system by which the top 1% most influential Metics can reliably become Citizens...and no more than that for this era. The political purpose of granting powerful Metics citizenship is to eliminate Metics who normally would be dissatisfied by the system by making them part of the social class whose privileges are to be protected, and who thus wouldn't rock the boat too hard, instead favoring backdoor favors for the metics who are their friends, rather than pushing for Metic rights as a broader class.
That's... not a bad idea. Unfortunately we're too far before Machiavelli for the idea to really spread around in-character within the system of Eretrian politics.
 
What about user motions?
I don't think Machiavelli invented meritocracy as a isolating mechanism for classes :V
What I meant is, IC we'd pretty much have to have the ekklesia thinking "you know, it's fine if the hundredth or so of the metics with the greatest arete are made citizens by acclamation of the ekklesia" as opposed to "meritocratically promote the most talented metics to isolate them from the rest."

Machiavelli didn't invent the idea- he didn't really invent any of the political ideas associated with his name. But he arguably invented "openly talking about those ideas."
 
Actually from what I can figure out, ideally we want a system by which the top 1% most influential Metics can reliably become Citizens...and no more than that for this era. The political purpose of granting powerful Metics citizenship is to eliminate Metics who normally would be dissatisfied by the system by making them part of the social class whose privileges are to be protected, and who thus wouldn't rock the boat too hard, instead favoring backdoor favors for the metics who are their friends, rather than pushing for Metic rights as a broader class.
This is basically what we're doing by accepting heroes as citizens, just in a manner far more palatable to all involved (and ignoring several categories of influential metics).
 
That's a horrible idea, unless we get brought to the literal brink of destruction, Citizenship is really fucking sacred. Even Rome, who weren't even proper Greeks and only tried to copy the Greeks outright refused proper citizenship to Italia despite massively shared culture and centuries of rule as well as having relied on them heavily for the Punic Wars

Then what do you call the Social War of 88 BC? Where Rome won and then gave citizenship to all of Italy?

Or the fact that Emperor Caracalla decided that everyone in the empire are now citizens during his reign?
 
Then what do you call the Social War of 88 BC? Where Rome won and then gave citizenship to all of Italy?

Or the fact that Emperor Caracalla decided that everyone in the empire are now citizens during his reign?
The Social Wars occurred because Rome refused citizenship. Remember, this is centuries after Rome was a thing, and centuries since they had a large population of non-citizens, and a good long time after the Punic Wars where Rome had became, temporarily, massively reliant on the Italians around them.

And it still fits the description.
We will never realistically be able to hand out de facto citizenship to Metics. Not unless we are willing to burn half the city down
Rome refused for centuries, until their subjects literally burned half of Italy down, whereas half the I referenced half the city. Not the best time for anyone, with 1/3 of all the men mobilised, by both sides, dying.

Edit: I absolutely concede the point on Emperor Caracalla though.
 
Last edited:
Rome's big sticker was using City politics as an Empire. They resisted because a Citizen MUST be from The City, its in the name!
 
Actually, not sure if this can still be done or not but, @Cetashwayo, can we propose a user motion for a Metic-only jury?
I think it's been addressed a bit already, it'd take something big and bad to get us to reform a legal ideology that's guided our cities hand for its entire history, over half a century, since it's vey foundations and has been defended from constant Metic attempts to hangs it during the near entirety of that time.
The city has been quite firm about maintaining a single set of courts, and I think it's only fair to live with both positive and negative consequences
Here is the relevant quote
 
I think it's been addressed a bit already, it'd take something big and bad to get us to reform a legal ideology that's guided our cities hand for its entire history, over half a century, since it's vey foundations and has been defended from constant Metic attempts to hangs it during the near entirety of that time.

Here is the relevant quote
Except I am not saying divide it into two whole new courts, merely the jury part of it.
 
I'd point out that the hardening of the exclusivity of citizenship is still relatively novel at this time period - Athens has only required two citizen parents to inherit citizenship for barely two decades at this point.
 
Back
Top