Why does Peloria/Dara Happa suck so much?

[Ageha]

On 1/8/2024 at 11:42 PM, Jeff said:

So wait, Dara Happa is kind of dumb despite dominating most of Peloria for most of the last 16 centuries because it does that with an imperial system instead of council? Dara Happa believes that a monarchy, with the monarchy being descended from the Sun God, is the rightful form of government. Large Orlanthi polities are almost always confederations of groups held together by a ruling council from the groups. The Orlanthi regularly create confederations with their equals, the Dara Happan rulers traditional recognise no outside equals.

Which is pretty normal for imperial systems.

No, I am clearly not expressing myself clearly, my apologies. I will try to express more clearly what I meant here: 

What they are stupid for is not realizing the importance of coopeting other groups into imperial building projects. This is a core pillar of all empire building in recorded history. From Egyptian use of Kush and 'Libya', Macedonian incorporation of Greek and later Iranian states, Roman use of auxillaries and client kingdoms etc. etc. every large empire building project in history comes to recognize the importance, and utility, of coopeting certain groups/states/factions which are foreign to their own. Typically, often, this involves granting greater largesse to those groups, or a significant role in the system of power not afforded to other groups. If Pelorians have not yet realized this and just try to enforce their own direct hegemony with no coopting of other local players to their advantage then I can start to see why they have never really managed to construct any signficant empire. Convincing peoples that they are active participants in, and members of, an imperial identity over simply subjects has been a core tactic of imperialism throughout history. 

But as it has been broadly agreed that there is no real claim to Pelorian imperial legacy, this does make sense. They aren't good at empire building and so, unsurprisingly, they've never succeeded at it much compared to the Orlanthi, Malkioni or, more recently, the Pentans. 

I don't understand the 'dominating Peloria for 16 centuries' thing. During the Council already southern Peloria (the Pelorian Hills) was ruled by the Council, not Pelorians/Dara Happa. I could not find anywhere that it seems to indicate Dara Happa/Peloria influence ever managed to extend into southern Peloria until the 3 Brothers Who Divided the World. I am a little surprised southern Peloria is still so Orlanthi not Pelorian, considering it was a core part of this division, it once more seems to reinforce this thing where Orlanthi culture spreads and becomes the dominant culture of regions but even when Pelorians rule a region for centuries for some reason they do not become the dominant culture as described by the guide to Glorantha. 

I feel what is true, for sure, is that Dara Happa has been the dominant force in northern Peloria for most of the past 16 centuries. But, at least based on what I've read so far so I always stand to be corrected, southern Peloria seems only to have been under their overall dominance since the 3 Brothers Who Divided the World and, even then, considering when the Lunar Empire arrives to the provinces they are described, uniformly, as Orlanthi-culture, Orlanthi-worshiping peoples, it is clear that Dara Happa/Peloria did not dominate the region long even at that point.

On 1/8/2024 at 11:42 PM, Jeff said:

But is Dara Happa culture influential even among those who do not revere Yelm as the ruling god or reject the Lunar Way? Absolutely. It is perfectly normal to see tribal kings emulate the emperor or even try to assert greater powers. Theyalan scribes read Dara Happan manuals on celestiology. Pelorian philosophy has proven influential and the Moon Rune is largely accepted as one of the Elemental Runes. This is no doubt more prevalent in the Pelorian hills than in Sartar or beyond, but that's a byproduct of the Inhuman Occupation and the resettlement of Dragon Pass.

 

That is fine and interesting to hear, but it is not what I am talking about in this case. I am talking about the actual spread of the cultural group. Per Guide To Glorantha Vol 1 Pelorian is the 4th smallest major culture, behind Orlanthi (which is first), Fonritian, Krloleran and Western. Pelorian is also, per the Guide, one of, if not the, single most contained culture (outside Praxian), with absolutely no spread outside of Peloria whatsoever. 

That is what I am discussing. The actual growth of the culture as a population. The Guide is very clear that southern Peloria is explicitly stated to be populated by Orlanthi peoples, not Pelorian peoples, for example.

On 1/9/2024 at 12:28 AM, Richard S. said:

What is Pelorian culture? I think if we want to define it at the most basic, it's an upper class of sky-worshipers ruling over a fire-and-earth-worshiping peasantry. The former live mostly in cities, the latter mostly in villages, and relations between the two are tightly bound up in ritual. Both classes rely on each other, and it's hard for the whole structure to be exported elsewhere without an empire to back it up. Elements of their technology and government can and have been adopted elsewhere though, like the lod-plow and possibly the idea of hereditary kingship, and arguably the Sun Dome Temples are Pelorian societies in miniature.

Orlanthi culture? I'd say it's a partnership of air and earth cults living in self-sufficient family groups, with government going to the person with the greatest magical, martial, and social strength in the community. That same idea of strength extends both above and below the basic clan unit, so leadership is very flexible (if a little unstable). For this reason it's fairly easy for Orlanthi to enter an area, as shown by the numerous migrations they've engaged in throughout time, they don't need much outside help to remain, and they mix easily with other cultures (to the point that I'd argue there are actually several distinct cultures under the "orlanthi" label).

I do not fully agree with what you say here. Centralized systems of governance based off the concept of a strict class division as you are describing proved in actual human history to be incredibly effective at spreading to other lands and cultures. 

Usually, as all successful empires do, by simply coopting a conquered elite to emulate the same urban status and then the relationship naturally molded itself as even without central governance 'urban elite' ruling over 'large agricultural class' occurred naturally in societies everywhere.

On 1/9/2024 at 10:06 AM, Ali the Helering said:

Or, at least, that is the story as they tell it in the here and now.  GRoY and FS indicate massive internal strife and divisions at various stages, even with both of those documents emerging as propogandist imperial doctrine.

'Dominant' is a bit difficult to justify given the power of Spolism, Draconism, Nysalor, Sheng Seleris, Rinliddi, the Hyalorings, and the strife within the Tripolis and between city and countryside, as well as a new Celestial but markedly non-Solar (in her present form) God-of-Rule to name but some of the issues they have faced and are facing.  I think 'most prominent' is as far as one could realistically go.

Agreed completely. I would think even 'most prominent' extends only to northern Peloria at most, not all of Peloria. 

On 1/9/2024 at 11:49 AM, French Desperate WindChild said:

reading all the comments, I wonder if there were more Dara Happan material (chaosium & JC scenarios, setting books, prirority in the cult books, etc..) the opinions we have would be the same.

 

and there is something ... I m not sure of the right words (linguee gave me a lot but I m not confortable to choose so..)  to not offense anyone I will just ask questions :

 

Does today France suck more than French colonial empire 2 centuries ago because the territory is smaller ?

Do the vast majority of men suck because there "Lodril's gear" are ridiculous compared to mine ? (second degree, I m in the stats)

 

Should a country, a community, an empire be the bigger, with the bigger cities to be the best ?
It is clear, even today, that some leaders believe it, able to use war to prove how the best they are,.

 

Or are there other "variables" ? Is it even possible to define a real hierarchy ?

No, because France is an actual place with actual people and far, far more complex than that, whilst this is a fictional story and game with a narrative where one invests in the narrative and the components thereof. I would never describe any real place as 'sucking' because reality isn't a story. When I play warhammer and cheer on my factions victory that does not mean in the real world I want to see war and death. There is a fundamental difference between investing in a fictional narrative and the real world. 

As for would the opinions change: that would depend on what is presented. The core thing, at the moment, is just that, as has been discussed here now, Dara Happa/Peloria has no real claims of imperial legacy outside before time began. They have only ever been a small region fought over and conquered by larger polities (Pentans/Dorastor/Orlanthi/Malkioni) until the brief anomaly of the Lunar Empire which, we already know, just winds up destroyed by Orlanthi again.

I think, in the end, although some differences do persist, we have at least largely gained consensus on the broad idea: Peloria has never been a major imperial centre and thus its claims to such, repeated as objective by source books, are incorrect. I don't really know if that can be changed because it is the result of the existing history. 

10 hours ago, Sir_Godspeed said:

In some ways the core issue in the OP's question has been somewhat answered and resolved - and I think it's sorta undeniable that yeah, the imperial claims of the Dara Happan elite are somewhat exaggerated, and well, I must admit that I thought that was kinda the point. It's a bit tongue-in-cheek, with the most pompous and chauvinist culture being kind of a tossing ball between various powers and very much having its glory in the distant past. Their dogmatic claims to cultural constancy being all but fabricated, their claims to divinely ordained paramountcy being political propaganda, and so forth. That's one of the undercurrents I got from reading GRoY and then going on to read Fortunate Succession, at least. Adding the Entekosiad to that forms a trilogy of thoroughly deconstructing the Dara Happan mytho-political legitimacy project.

 

Sure, this is the impression I get which then is exactly why I do not like this particular aspect of the world building. I dislike whenever a fictional world presenting as a pseudo-history decides to include nations and people just to be losers to laugh at and be stupid. It is simply something I do not enjoy at all. How you have expressed it here is a very good summation of my current feelings on it, I thank you for that, I appreciate it a lot. 

10 hours ago, Sir_Godspeed said:

This leads me into wondering if another version of Glorantha where Peloria wasn't landlocked would have yielded a different worldbuilding where Pelorian empires spread different, and their culture was more readily visible - much like Malkionism is today. Often, worldbuilding is iterative and once you've locked yourself into one track you just kinda have to work with it. Peloria is landlocked, so that's just kinda the world we got, one where the big imperial culture is also kind of a global backwater. Weird, but maybe not completely unprecedented - China has *shades* of that through history. 

 

Being landlocked certainly would have an impact, but to describe China such as this is, I believe, just inaccurate. Furthermore, Chinese cultural expansion is massive, not contained only to a small core area at all, so I don't really see it as comparable to Peloria personally.

10 hours ago, Sir_Godspeed said:

This is why I'm a bit skeptical of discussing Pelorian culture as something conceptually unified that CAN be exported. 

 

The Guide explicitly does and that is good enough for me personally. It is a core canonical document. If it says all those peoples can be discussed under the umbrella of a broad 'Pelorian Culture' just as all the different Orlanthi groups can, then I accept that as canonical. 

10 hours ago, Sir_Godspeed said:

Lastly, one thing I wanted to add is just the general reminder that Peloria is HUGE. It's MASSIVE compared to what is sometimes presented as its geopolitical rival in Kethaela and upland Kerofinela. And of course, depending on how you draw the borders, Kerofinela isn't so much its own region as its a saddle straddling both southern Peloria and northern Kethaela (which explains why "the Pelorians have never controlled all of Peloria" - it's not an innately a 100% Solar region to begin with.)

Dara Happa/Pelorians only control northern Peloria, not all of Peloria. Also, again, I am not discussing religions. I am discussing the culture. Pelorians do not have to worship Yelm just as Orlanthi do not have to worship Orlanth. 

9 hours ago, Heltver said:

I don’t necessarily feel so sad for the Pelorians  - I think of them more like Egypt - not a massively expansionist empire, but an incredibly enduring one, and that is awe inspiring in a different way.

I have to disagree with this I am afraid. 'Ancient Egypt' was a massively expansionistic empire in their time. During the Bronze Age they expanded across the entire Levant, to their west and down the length of the Nile. They grew to be one of the largest empires of the entire period, rivaled only at times by the Hittites and the Assyrians. Egypt was absolutely a massive expansionist empire during its heyday, quite literally one of the great empire builders of the time period in the near east, subjugating many lands and peoples far-and-wide. 

9 hours ago, Heltver said:

I also wish that there was a triumphant feminine hero instead of them always losing to boys.

Agreed with this 100% absolutely. We differ on this, I am sure, but I absolutely cannot stand Jar-Eel for personal reasons. 

I will admit, on a tangent unrelated to the topic but which occurred to me recently, it is very, very, funny that the faith which is all about legitimate authority and imperial mandate is not even a major power of the explicitly called 'Imperial Age'. With the Imperial Powers being explicitly Orlanthi and Malkioni. 

Fire/Sky faith must certainly have the award for most deluded of the major pantheons in the setting, the Storm Pantheon and the God Learners are considerably better at the concept and execution of authority and imperialism than they are. Which is funny considering how much the Storm Pantheon likes to cast itself as anti-imperialist, but are probably the single most successful group of imperialists in the setting, either just behind, just ahead or tied with the Malkioni. 

Edited January 14 by Ageha
added some clarity to my statements

[radmonger]

1 hour ago, Ageha said:

Dara Happa/Pelorians only control northern Peloria, not all of Peloria. Also, again, I am not discussing religions. I am discussing the culture. Pelorians do not have to worship Yelm just as Orlanthi do not have to worship Orlanth. 

If you are discussing culture instead of cult, then by what measure is say Nochet not a Dara Happan city? What aspects of material, non-magical culture do they lack that Dara Happan culture has?

The differences between Nochet and Yuthuppa are entirely that of cult and mythology. Nochet is ruled by Ernalda, queen of the Gods, former underwife of Yelm.  Yuthuppa is currently ruled by the Red Godess, Yelm's daughter. That's not independent centers of development of technology clashing, that is the result of political and religious conflict within one common framework.

To some degree, all known Genertalan cities are solar cities, they just express that nature differently. Dara Happa is just the place that does so by claiming close continuity to the mythical pre-time concept of Solar Empire. The cities that existed before their cavalry became nomads, and their peasants hunter gatherers.

 

 

[Mao]

2 minutes ago, radmonger said:

If you are discussing culture instead of cult, then by what measure is say Nochet not a Dara Happan city? What aspects of material, non-magical culture do they lack that Dara Happan culture has?

The differences between Nochet and Yuthuppa are entirely that of cult and mythology. Nochet is ruled by Ernalda, queen of the Gods, former underwife of Yelm.  Yuthuppa is currently ruled by the Red Godess, Yelm's daughter. That's not independent centers of development of technology clashing, that is the result of political and religious conflict within one common framework.

To some degree, all known Genertalan cities are solar cities, they just express that nature differently. Dara Happa is just the place that does so by claiming close continuity to the mythical pre-time concept of Solar Empire. The cities that existed before their cavalry became nomads, and their peasants hunter gatherers.

 

 

I was actually thinking of mentioning that per Wyrms Footprints suggests that the system of rank and nobility among the Orlanthi pantheon (and one might assume that filters down to the Orlanthi themselves) is an emulation of Yelm's social order. Wyrms Fooprints goes even farther and suggest that Yelm's position as Emperor introduced politics as such into myth.
Essentially, all complex social organization higher than a clan or a family (that uses a system of nobility and rank) can, in some way, be traced back to Yelm's status as the Emperor. 
"Yelm's leadership was one of his attributes, but leadership implies a followership too, and that is the origin of political interactions."
So, if we go back to the issue raised by this thread: that Pelorian influence is restricted to a tiny corner of Genertela, and isn't as expansive or culturally influential as the Orlanthi. I think rather that the influence of the Solars is so pervasive in terms of social organization that people take what they get from it for granted, while forgetting or ignoring where it came from in the first place.
I would suggest that it's similar to how people don't even think of business suits as a distinctly 'English' mode of dress anymore, because it's so culturally pervasive across the world at this point that it's just assumed as the norm.
 

[Ynneadwraith]

6 hours ago, Ageha said:

...every large empire building project in history comes to recognize the importance, and utility, of coopeting certain groups/states/factions which are foreign to their own. Typically, often, this involves granting greater largesse to those groups, or a significant role in the system of power not afforded to other groups...

I haven't read the rest of the comment yet, but I just want to challenge this notion as it's not really true for the vast majority of pre-modern empires. If your main conception of pre-modern empires is the Roman Empire then it's understandable that that's the schema you've come away with though (I'll explain that in a mo).

What actually happens is the ruling elite usually try everything they can get away with to prevent 'everyone else' having any modicum of power at all. The Alexandrian successor states are an obvious example of this. In no successor state in any of the years the Greeks were in power did the ruling class let anyone non-Greek in, or divest any of the power they had to non-Greeks. What they set up was a Greek/Macedonian ruling class, in which no positions of power were available to non-Greeks. This was the norm for pre-modern empires, and was why dynasty changes were such a big/common thing. It was frequently the only way to shift the power balance within a state.

This is reflected all the way down the 'social complexity' ladder, with Greek city states generally having extremely closed citizen voting bodies, in which to have citizen status you must have a citizen mother and father. There was some degree of flexibility to this over time and in some places e.g. some city states when they had shortages of manpower managed to extend their enfranchisement to people like half-citizen underclasses, though often this failed as there was significant social pushback from 'full-citizens'.

You are correct in your assumption that this is not the best way to run an empire. However, people rarely make decisions on what it objectively best for the society they find themselves in once those social structures exceed certain levels of complexity (to the point that we need all sorts of societal propaganda to get it to work). Instead, they largely make decisions to improve their own lot (and/or the lots of their families and friends) within a set of traditional mechanisms of how a society functions.

The Romans

One of, if not the major advantage the Romans had is they produced a different set of assumptions to how the vast majority of empires work. Instead of making their citizenship body exclusive, they went out of their way to make it possible for non-citizens to gain citizenship status. This wasn't some magnanimous offer, it was a product of a bit of luck and a lot of trauma.

On the luck side, Rome started its life as a border town on the edge of ethnic Latin territory and next to ethnic Umbrian and ethnic Etruscan territory, and likely involved an initial citizenship body comprised of all three ethnicities. This gave them a bit more of a multicultural outlook than a mono-ethnic Greek city state to begin with.

On the trauma side, Brennus and the Senones sacked Rome in 390BC which left a major impression on its citizens. Pretty much all of Rome's weird decisions from that point on can be viewed as a determination to NEVER LET THAT HAPPEN AGAIN.

Rome mobilised a much larger proportion of its citizens for war from that point on. When it joined a war alongside its allies, instead of just pillaging the loser it forcibly co-opted it into its allies network (the socii), making the point to call it an 'ally' instead of a conquered people. It broadened the already liberal ability to gain Roman citizenship to allow enfranchisement through armed service, or marriage between a Roman citizen and a Socii one.

Again, this wasn't a move of intentional Imperialism, or some nation-building idea of uniting everyone in Italy. The sole motivation was to get more soldiers on the field.

This continues throughout Rome's history, with various additional enfranchisements taking place in the response to military crises (e.g. Hannibal, various migrations from outside the empire). Until, for various complicated reasons, it stops. The latest wave of Germanic migrations doesn't get resettled into the empire under Roman structures and with the full 'Roman package' of being able to participate in the Roman political system. Instead, they get incorporated as 'Foederati' and this sets of a whole load of unhelpful things that contribute to the fall of the Western Empire.

So, be careful of applying the Roman model to other Empires. Rome was weird. That's one of the reasons it was so successful. Imperial China was weird too, though I'm less au fait with precisely how and why.

In fact, this is one of the ways in which the Lunars do actually resemble Rome. It largely doesn't matter who you are, you can be a Lunar as well.

Edited January 14 by Ynneadwraith

[Sir_Godspeed]

This is a bit of an aside the discussion, and isn't likely to sway anyone's opinion either way - but it's worth thinking about how the current Orlanthi pantheon and mythos was also quite heavily influenced by contact with Peloria and Dara Happa under the Council and Bright Empire. There appears to have been a wholesale synthesis going on, where Rebellus Terminus was identified with Orlanth, and the Bad Emperor was identified with Yelm - but that's probably just scratching the surface. There's also the possibility that the entire Lightbringer mythos was altered during this period, going from the quest to revive Ernalda, to becoming the quest for Orlanth and Yelm to make up. But this latter point is completely conspiratorial (even if I think it's neat.) 

Of course, this isn't really a case of a Pelorian polity imposing its doctrines on its subjects, so doesn't really count - but it's one of those examples of how Pelorian ideas have spread.

[radmonger]

17 hours ago, Ageha said:

This is a core pillar of all empire building in recorded history.

I think this is the key point Dara Happa never had to build an empire. It preceded the nomads and barbarians who split off from it.

All real world empires started small, and had to build to whatever size they ended up as. With Rome as the outlier, and they do genuinely have lot in common with the Lunars.

Dara Happa started out large, possibly even lozenge-wide. Its whole claim is to unique purity and longevity, though presumably the Kraloreans would disagree. Their whole deal is that if the lunars are able to conquer the world, the result would be stable and peaceful.

At least until Glorantha gets hit by another rogue planet...

 

 

[Joerg]

The idea of Empire with benevolent (?) Yelmic overseers has been exported from Dara Happa through the Bright Empire.

In the Bright Empire, Hrelar Amali was the seat of Holy Estorex, a Dara Happan missionary who greatly influenced the cult of Ehilm and its role in subsequent Malkionized nobility (e.g. Gerlant's lineage through Nralar) and which may have provided the role model for Safelstran city states. There are Dara Happan-style overseers in all of Old Carmania and along the Janube.

Urban and riverine Saird has Dara Happan culture blended with the Ernaldan/Orlanthi society.

Yelmic culture, bureaucracy and literacy are as wide-spread. Malkioni talar administration might have been a counter-culture, but at least Seshnela and thereby the God Learner empire was infected by Yelmic notions of administration.

Pelorian worship bows to the administration of Yelmic (or Idovanic) administration, too. If you visit a Lodrili or Weeder rite, there will be imperial priesthood overseeing the rites. The Yelmalio cult north of Kero Fin probably has them, too.

 

I am (still) in the process of transcribing episode 29 of the God Learners podcast, and we had a lively discussion about the prevalence of imperial education in the Provinces. Out soon.

[metcalph]

9 hours ago, radmonger said:

I think this is the key point Dara Happa never had to build an empire. It preceded the nomads and barbarians who split off from it.

All real world empires started small, and had to build to whatever size they ended up as. With Rome as the outlier, and they do genuinely have lot in common with the Lunars.

Dara Happa started out large, possibly even lozenge-wide. Its whole claim is to unique purity and longevity, though presumably the Kraloreans would disagree. Their whole deal is that if the lunars are able to conquer the world, the result would be stable and peaceful.

At least until Glorantha gets hit by another rogue planet...

The Dara Happans may think that but the nearby cultures have a different view.  The Entekosiad (p30-31) tells the story of Brightface who was supposedly a loyal servant of the White Queen.  He conquered the whole world (or the lands surrounding Pelanda) for the White Queen before overthrowing her in a coup.  So their Empire was built but they chose to believe it was divinely ordained.

[Ynneadwraith]

15 minutes ago, metcalph said:

The Dara Happans may think that but the nearby cultures have a different view.  The Entekosiad (p30-31) tells the story of Brightface who was supposedly a loyal servant of the White Queen.  He conquered the whole world (or the lands surrounding Pelanda) for the White Queen before overthrowing her in a coup.  So their Empire was built but they chose to believe it was divinely ordained.

Or, their empire already existed and someone post-hoc edited a portion of mythic history into existence to describe how it became (mythology adores its just so stories).

Debating Gloranthan pre-history is doubly complicated because it's a past that's editable from the present.

Edited January 15 by Ynneadwraith

[Sir_Godspeed]

33 minutes ago, Ynneadwraith said:

Or, their empire already existed and someone post-hoc edited a portion of mythic history into existence to describe how it became (mythology adores its just so stories).

Debating Gloranthan pre-history is doubly complicated because it's a past that's editable from the present.

While I agree that heroquesting and grand mythical "reeducation" can retroactively change mythological "past", I am wary of applying it liberally because then nothing means anything - you know? 

In the case of the Entekosiad, I genuinly think the simplest approach is to take it at face value and assume that the LATER golden age societies tried to overwrite the worldviews of EARLIER Green Age societies, rather than a more convoluted story about how someone in Time heroquested to rewrite Green Age myths to delegitimize contemporary societies that drew their legitimacy from Golden Age myths. If that makes sense. There's also that even OTHER Dara Happans question the narrative put forth in Glorious Reascent of Yelm, for example. 

Regarding Dara Happan claims to universality: God Learners equated Yelm or Murharzarm with Govmeranen, right? Do we know if there's any validity to that aside from mythical equivalencies - were there any gigantic polity we could recognizably identify as a state that covered at least the entire upper-right half of Glorantha, from Peloria to Vithela? Or is it merely a way of saying "these societies were all primarily sun-worshipping."

[Ynneadwraith]

Agreed. I was trying to think of a way of wording it that wouldn't come off as 'there's no point searching for truth because absolutely anything can be fabricated', and more 'the fact that things can be fabricated needs to be taken into account'. I think you've done a better job at getting that across than I have.

While you're right that the simpler approach is to take it at face value, and thus that's more likely to be true, the opposite is also a plausible possibility. Seeking to destabilise a contemporary society by removing their source of legitimacy is something that's happened a fair few times, both in Glorantha and the real world. Take Lunar Tarsh and 'Old Gusty'. Or proselytising Christianity with their 'one true God...and all those other gods you've been worshipping must have been angels the whole time'.

The difference with Glorantha, as I see it, is that if you convince those pagan folks that their gods actually were angels...they actually become angels (because they exist outside the restraints of Time). It's gloriously messy. No wonder the godlearners wanted to inject some semblance of order into things.

You do raise some good points though (especially about maintaining morale in the face of the potentially limitless complexity).

[mfbrandi]

16 hours ago, Sir_Godspeed said:

There's also the possibility that the entire Lightbringer mythos was altered during this period, going from the quest to revive Ernalda, to becoming the quest for Orlanth and Yelm to make up. But this latter point is completely conspiratorial (even if I think it's neat.)

The quest to revive Ernalda = the quest for spring/sea season = the quest to bring back the sun/Yelm.

Orlanth is happiest when his wife is dead (he didn’t even notice she was missing) and his cold winds are blowing in the dark of winter/storm season, no? The lads’ handshake version of the myth has Yelm saying something like, “OK, you can have your precious gods’ war back every year, but it ends at sacred time. Why couldn’t I have been dealing with Brian Wilson? He would have settled for endless summer fire season.”

I have never bought into the negotiated peace version of the story. I have a more cosmos-emerges-from-chaos-but-cannot-truly-escape-from-it take on time. 😉

[scott-martin]

2 hours ago, mfbrandi said:

Orlanth is happiest when his wife is dead

Looking back, the identity of the Jar is a cult secret kept from Adventurous, whose participation in the quest is more oedipal (Kero Fin is the dead goddess and dad is a suffering titan) than romantic. Since then the pendulum of understanding has swung to promote the settled interpretation. And that's okay.

I think you just solved the dangling question of why the "theyalan" seasons progress in the order they do, including finding a role for Indlas Somer.

5 hours ago, Joerg said:

Hrelar Amali was the seat of Holy Estorex

Hot stuff!

[Joerg]

2 hours ago, mfbrandi said:

Orlanth is happiest when his wife is dead

She is not dead, she is sleeping. Probably snoring gently, but at least she stopped nagging him.

2 hours ago, mfbrandi said:

his cold winds are blowing in the dark of winter/storm season, 

Not Orlanth. He is just full of hot air. Maybe under pressure - we all know how gas cools down when leaving through a nozzel - but cold is not really a feature of Orlanth. His sister Inora got all of that.

[jajagappa]

1 hour ago, Joerg said:

His sister Inora got all of that.

And his nephew Valind.

[Ageha]

On 1/14/2024 at 12:17 PM, radmonger said:

If you are discussing culture instead of cult, then by what measure is say Nochet not a Dara Happan city? What aspects of material, non-magical culture do they lack that Dara Happan culture has?

The differences between Nochet and Yuthuppa are entirely that of cult and mythology. Nochet is ruled by Ernalda, queen of the Gods, former underwife of Yelm.  Yuthuppa is currently ruled by the Red Godess, Yelm's daughter. That's not independent centers of development of technology clashing, that is the result of political and religious conflict within one common framework.

To some degree, all known Genertalan cities are solar cities, they just express that nature differently. Dara Happa is just the place that does so by claiming close continuity to the mythical pre-time concept of Solar Empire. The cities that existed before their cavalry became nomads, and their peasants hunter gatherers.

 

 

I do not personally agree with this. The source material makes very definitive statements about Esrolia, explicitly states it is populated by an Orlanthi people who practise an Orlanthi culture but happen to revere Ernalda above Orlanth.

Nochet is clearly not Dara Happan since the populace are stated outright to be Orlanthi, not Pelorian.

On 1/14/2024 at 12:29 PM, Mao said:

I was actually thinking of mentioning that per Wyrms Footprints suggests that the system of rank and nobility among the Orlanthi pantheon (and one might assume that filters down to the Orlanthi themselves) is an emulation of Yelm's social order. Wyrms Fooprints goes even farther and suggest that Yelm's position as Emperor introduced politics as such into myth.
Essentially, all complex social organization higher than a clan or a family (that uses a system of nobility and rank) can, in some way, be traced back to Yelm's status as the Emperor. 
"Yelm's leadership was one of his attributes, but leadership implies a followership too, and that is the origin of political interactions."
So, if we go back to the issue raised by this thread: that Pelorian influence is restricted to a tiny corner of Genertela, and isn't as expansive or culturally influential as the Orlanthi. I think rather that the influence of the Solars is so pervasive in terms of social organization that people take what they get from it for granted, while forgetting or ignoring where it came from in the first place.
I would suggest that it's similar to how people don't even think of business suits as a distinctly 'English' mode of dress anymore, because it's so culturally pervasive across the world at this point that it's just assumed as the norm.
 

I think this isn't strictly relevant to what I am discussins as I'm discussing population groups as specified by the canon books.

To use your metaphor: it is agreed things like 'English' and 'Japanese' identity exist. Wearing a suit is not considered to make you part of either identity.

Similarly, I am discussing Pelorian the cultural population as specified in the canon books. 

On 1/14/2024 at 1:59 PM, Ynneadwraith said:

I haven't read the rest of the comment yet, but I just want to challenge this notion as it's not really true for the vast majority of pre-modern empires. If your main conception of pre-modern empires is the Roman Empire then it's understandable that that's the schema you've come away with though (I'll explain that in a mo).

What actually happens is the ruling elite usually try everything they can get away with to prevent 'everyone else' having any modicum of power at all. The Alexandrian successor states are an obvious example of this. In no successor state in any of the years the Greeks were in power did the ruling class let anyone non-Greek in, or divest any of the power they had to non-Greeks. What they set up was a Greek/Macedonian ruling class, in which no positions of power were available to non-Greeks. This was the norm for pre-modern empires, and was why dynasty changes were such a big/common thing. It was frequently the only way to shift the power balance within a state.

This is reflected all the way down the 'social complexity' ladder, with Greek city states generally having extremely closed citizen voting bodies, in which to have citizen status you must have a citizen mother and father. There was some degree of flexibility to this over time and in some places e.g. some city states when they had shortages of manpower managed to extend their enfranchisement to people like half-citizen underclasses, though often this failed as there was significant social pushback from 'full-citizens'.

You are correct in your assumption that this is not the best way to run an empire. However, people rarely make decisions on what it objectively best for the society they find themselves in once those social structures exceed certain levels of complexity (to the point that we need all sorts of societal propaganda to get it to work). Instead, they largely make decisions to improve their own lot (and/or the lots of their families and friends) within a set of traditional mechanisms of how a society functions.

The Romans

One of, if not the major advantage the Romans had is they produced a different set of assumptions to how the vast majority of empires work. Instead of making their citizenship body exclusive, they went out of their way to make it possible for non-citizens to gain citizenship status. This wasn't some magnanimous offer, it was a product of a bit of luck and a lot of trauma.

On the luck side, Rome started its life as a border town on the edge of ethnic Latin territory and next to ethnic Umbrian and ethnic Etruscan territory, and likely involved an initial citizenship body comprised of all three ethnicities. This gave them a bit more of a multicultural outlook than a mono-ethnic Greek city state to begin with.

On the trauma side, Brennus and the Senones sacked Rome in 390BC which left a major impression on its citizens. Pretty much all of Rome's weird decisions from that point on can be viewed as a determination to NEVER LET THAT HAPPEN AGAIN.

Rome mobilised a much larger proportion of its citizens for war from that point on. When it joined a war alongside its allies, instead of just pillaging the loser it forcibly co-opted it into its allies network (the socii), making the point to call it an 'ally' instead of a conquered people. It broadened the already liberal ability to gain Roman citizenship to allow enfranchisement through armed service, or marriage between a Roman citizen and a Socii one.

Again, this wasn't a move of intentional Imperialism, or some nation-building idea of uniting everyone in Italy. The sole motivation was to get more soldiers on the field.

This continues throughout Rome's history, with various additional enfranchisements taking place in the response to military crises (e.g. Hannibal, various migrations from outside the empire). Until, for various complicated reasons, it stops. The latest wave of Germanic migrations doesn't get resettled into the empire under Roman structures and with the full 'Roman package' of being able to participate in the Roman political system. Instead, they get incorporated as 'Foederati' and this sets of a whole load of unhelpful things that contribute to the fall of the Western Empire.

So, be careful of applying the Roman model to other Empires. Rome was weird. That's one of the reasons it was so successful. Imperial China was weird too, though I'm less au fait with precisely how and why.

In fact, this is one of the ways in which the Lunars do actually resemble Rome. It largely doesn't matter who you are, you can be a Lunar as well.

I have to disagree. Though all empires practise it to differing extents, for sure, and though all empires are, unsurprisingly, a complex mix of practises, to act as if Rome was unique is simply factually incorrect.

Empires from the bronze age utilized this system, client kingdoms existed expressly for it. It was why Achaemenids would maintain local rulers in subjuated territories, why Alexander appointed Iranians to continue as administrators, even gave Atrapatene his own entire kingdom. Alexander's willingness to adopt and embrace local rulers even angered many of his own commanders.

Rome 'exceptionalism' is a common historical myth, but the broad scholarly consensus is that all empires practise a mixture of exclusion and inclusion, in varying amounts, for sure, but it is simply not true that Rome was a unique or sui generis case of this. That they certainly improved on certain ideas, of course, all empires, all states, are in a constant flux of both improvement on prior ideas and regression, actual empires and states are organic things, not static. But the idea had been employed from the days of the Achaemends (and before) and was employed by numerous empires both prior, post and contemporaneously with Rome. The idea that Rome's collapse was largely due to some specific inability to assimilate Germanic migrants is also not widely agreed upon anymore, far too restrictive and reductive a view is the general opinion, and a much larger net of factors are usually agreed as causing it.

It is a staple of imperialism to coopt and exploit via integration of certain groups to the advantage of the imperial metropole. But, of course, as all empires are diverse, complex, confusing mixes of policies and actions what you will see when studying any empire's history is a combination of these practises, and the reverse of them, being employed. On these grounds I do not fully agree with your assertion. Rome certainly utilized several innovative systems of administration, as did their successors and predecessors, but they were by no means alone in this among 'pre-modern empires'.

If the Lunar Empire is meant to be more like Rome, which I completely do agree with, then it is even more surprising to me that the Provinces which have been under its rule for four centuries are still explicitly stated to be Orlanthi-populated Orlanthi-culture areas. That none of them are now dominated by a people who have culturally assimilated to be considered Pelorian by the guide, is surprising. I believe the one example of this that exists is Carmania, whose population are expressly now considered Pelorian due to cultural assimilation. In the same way as large populations in Fronela and Ralios are considered Orlanthi. 

10 hours ago, Joerg said:

The idea of Empire with benevolent (?) Yelmic overseers has been exported from Dara Happa through the Bright Empire.

In the Bright Empire, Hrelar Amali was the seat of Holy Estorex, a Dara Happan missionary who greatly influenced the cult of Ehilm and its role in subsequent Malkionized nobility (e.g. Gerlant's lineage through Nralar) and which may have provided the role model for Safelstran city states. There are Dara Happan-style overseers in all of Old Carmania and along the Janube.

Urban and riverine Saird has Dara Happan culture blended with the Ernaldan/Orlanthi society.

Yelmic culture, bureaucracy and literacy are as wide-spread. Malkioni talar administration might have been a counter-culture, but at least Seshnela and thereby the God Learner empire was infected by Yelmic notions of administration.

Pelorian worship bows to the administration of Yelmic (or Idovanic) administration, too. If you visit a Lodrili or Weeder rite, there will be imperial priesthood overseeing the rites. The Yelmalio cult north of Kero Fin probably has them, too.

 

I am (still) in the process of transcribing episode 29 of the God Learners podcast, and we had a lively discussion about the prevalence of imperial education in the Provinces. Out soon.

Southern Peloria is, per the Guide to Glorantha, explicitly described as being predominantly populated by Orlanthi peoples with an Orlanthi culture. 

If it was a blend, as you are saying, it would not be described like that. It would then be described as different, unique, culture.

It is not.

The guide is explicitly clear on this. Southern Peloria is simply outright stated to be Orlanthi. 

Again, I'm not discussing cults or such. I'm discussing the cultural populations. What you provide here are primaily hypothetical or potential distant, vague, connections and hints.

The Guide to Glorantha states outright that, canonically, there is no Pelorian cultural outside Peloria. That southern Peloria is Orlanthi culturally and not Pelorian. 

The guide is very clear on this. 

 

Thank you for everyone's insights. I appreciate the thoughtful feedback I have recieved from all.

At this point I am satisfied. Though differences might remain on smaller points I am satisfied with my position that Peloria has no imperial legacy and that its treatment (or I should rather say role) in the narrative is just something that will not sit well with me and upset me whenever I have to deal with it. For that reason, I will remain to my earlier conviction, though wonderfully creative Runequest is not for me.

Because internet discussions have a tendency to just go on and on forever and cycle back and deviate into tangents, and I don't have the constitution for it, I'm just letting everyone know then that I'm bowing out. Obviously feel free to talk still among yourselves here if you'd like, but I'm satisfied with the responses I've gotten an the consensus on the main, broad, point I wanted to clarify myself. 

In particular thank you a lot to Sir_Godspeed and Ali the Helering for actually putting into words some of what I wanted to say better than I could.

Thank you to everyone!

Edited January 15 by Ageha
Clarification

[Heltver]

On 1/13/2024 at 11:40 PM, Ageha said:

I have to disagree with this I am afraid. 'Ancient Egypt' was a massively expansionistic empire in their time. During the Bronze Age they expanded across the entire Levant, to their west and down the length of the Nile. They grew to be one of the largest empires of the entire period, rivaled only at times by the Hittites and the Assyrians. Egypt was absolutely a massive expansionist empire during its heyday, quite literally one of the great empire builders of the time period in the near east, subjugating many lands and peoples far-and-wide. 

Yes, fair enough, although with my limited knowledge of Egyptian history my impression is that they were expansionist in this way for a few hundred out of thousands of years. I think of them as a fairly insular culture for the bulk of their existence, which makes me think of sun worshipping Dara Happa. I could be wrong, but couldn't you think of the Lunar Empire as kind of like the New Kingdom, when the solar culture decided to finally start kicking butt beyond their borders?

I do get where you're coming from, though, and Solars as punching bags does kind of seem to permeate the setting and it rubs a lot of people the wrong way. I wouldn't have as much of an issue with it, except for the overall sense that they are doomed to continuously lose (if they are the bad guys, they should be badass and seem unbeatable). I thought there were some decent counterpoints to that in this thread, I just think that the Sartar and Orlanthi centric viewpoint of a lot of the material should be countered with more of a sense of them being more seriously threatened instead of always and repeatedly the victor (I don't think they actually are this, it's just that the presumed outcome of the Hero Wars makes it feel that way)

I get if it isn't for you, but there is so much richness and originality in the setting I kind of hope you'll stick with it and figure out how to make it yours. If you do have interest I really recommend Harald Smith's Edge of Empire Imther Campaign on Drive Thru RPG. I get the impression Harald had a similar complaints to you 40 years ago (Solars vs Orlanthi) and he developed his campaign to work through that. 

[Jeff]

Reading through this, it seems to me that the OP seems disappointed that Pelorian culture (lets call that the agrarian-urban mix of Yelm-Dendara, Lodril, Oria, Gorgorma, Dayzatar, and a few other celestial cults) hasn't managed to displace the Orlathi of South Peloria (say everything south of Jillaro) and the West Pelorian Hills.

And the answer is, they didn't manage to do that. Now there is a network of non-Pelorian solar temples - the Yelmalio cult - throughout that area, but they are Theyalan, not Pelorian. Those tenacious Orlanthi managed to get there first in the Dawn Ages and never could get completely dislodged. The best the Pelorians have managed to do is have some Second Age settlements in Saird, which remained like Sub-Roman dynasties. At least until Sheng Seleris messed everything up.

On the other hand, the Orlanthi never managed to displace the Pelorian culture and even lost a fair amount of their ground. Despite defeating the Dara Happans in the Gbaji Wars, they successfully rebelled and the Orlanthi got stuck paying the Troll Tax. Despite the EWF conquering Dara Happa, the Dara Happans again successfully rebelled and even planted the aforementioned colonies in Saird. The Dara Happans even made an alliance with their Carmanian rivals and led the Invincible Golden Horde into Dragon Pass - which was destroyed by the dragons, not the Orlanthi (who were already broken by the dragonewts and the trolls).

Now the Pelorians are ruled by a Lunar dynasty and have done better than any Pelorian empire in over a thousand years. But they still haven't managed to displace those pesky Orlanthi!

And that's about it. But everyone has their favourites and it is clear that the OP favours the Pelorians. Which is swell, but there really aren't any long-term winners. Empires rise and fall and sometimes even rise again. Confederations are formed, get defeated, and then form again. Rinse and repeat.

[Joerg]

11 hours ago, Ageha said:

Southern Peloria is, per the Guide to Glorantha, explicitly described as being predominantly populated by Orlanthi peoples with an Orlanthi culture. 

If it was a blend, as you are saying, it would not be described like that. It would then be described as different, unique, culture.

It is not.

The guide is explicitly clear on this. Southern Peloria is simply outright stated to be Orlanthi.

And the Orlanthi are of course (in)famous for being a hybrid culture with acculturation of foreign influences, like adopting an entire Water Tribe (the Helerings) into the Vingkotling kingdom, and more to the point the sun marriage with the descendants of Yamsur and Hyalor. Saird is an ancient Earth culture with Solar and Storm husband protectors and various beast totems, including lions, dogs, bears, raccoons, goats and rams, not to mention the continuum of water bird ancestor worship. Urban Saird follows the Dara Happan model, not some God Learner model that only indirectly was acculturated via the Bright Empire.

Riverine Saird follows the weeder ways, including cultivation or at least harvest of various forms of rice. Lowland Saird and Tarsh has "dry farming" aided by irrigation as rainfall north of the Rockwoods is rather limited. While the Taming of Sshorg(a) River may be explained by the Dragonspine falling across its course, there is also an interpretation of irrigation doing the trick, and Orlanth might merely take the credit from the Imperial imposition of irrigation of the Oslir (and its tributaries).

Also: Aren't Orlanthi living under a Dara Happan style urban system or the Sun Dome Temple theocacies the very definition of hegemony you are demanding?

"The Holy Roman Empire of German Nation" marks the end of Germanic independence from Roman imperial hegemony, bringing Germania Magna into the fold of Roman style legislation and jurisdiction (rather than the quaint continuation of Old Germanic tribal laws in Iceland and Anglo-Saxon territories). Same thing in Saird.

[Ynneadwraith]

12 hours ago, Ageha said:

I have to disagree. Though all empires practise it to differing extents, for sure, and though all empires are, unsurprisingly, a complex mix of practises, to act as if Rome was unique is simply factually incorrect.

You are, of course, correct. Though both points are correct to degrees. Rome wasn't exceptional in having these mechanisms at all, but it was exceptional in the degree with which it embraced them. The Achaemenids were exceptional as well, as was China at various points through its history, and the Mongol Empire, and the Ottomans, and a handful of others that managed to unify great swathes of territory for meaningful periods of time.

I get the impression you're judging the success of an Imperial regime against the very best the real world has ever produced. This is rareified company indeed. Compared to the thousands upon thousands of other polities that form the majority (including the Alexandrian successors), all of those mentioned above were exceptional.

I suppose that's your point, that Dara Happa doesn't feel exceptional (despite them telling themselves that they are). I suspect that a fair bit of that is the weight of history behind an Orlanthi-centric viewpoint. I'm happy with the depiction of Dara Happa as it is, but I'd love to see it explored in as much depth as we can get. I don't think it will ever be an Imperial Power like you'd want it to be, but that doesn't make it less interesting.

Of course, Glorantha is free to change as you desire. If you want a wildly successful Imperial Dara Happa (that's not the Lunar Empire), then make one!

[soltakss]

On 1/14/2024 at 7:40 AM, Ageha said:

What they are stupid for is not realizing the importance of coopeting other groups into imperial building projects. This is a core pillar of all empire building in recorded history. From Egyptian use of Kush and 'Libya', Macedonian incorporation of Greek and later Iranian states, Roman use of auxillaries and client kingdoms etc. etc. every large empire building project in history comes to recognize the importance, and utility, of coopeting certain groups/states/factions which are foreign to their own. Typically, often, this involves granting greater largesse to those groups, or a significant role in the system of power not afforded to other groups. If Pelorians have not yet realized this and just try to enforce their own direct hegemony with no coopting of other local players to their advantage then I can start to see why they have never really managed to construct any signficant empire. Convincing peoples that they are active participants in, and members of, an imperial identity over simply subjects has been a core tactic of imperialism throughout history. 

But, Dara Happans definitely did this. For example, they used Praxians to help drive out the Horse People in the First Age, and several groups remained behind. I'd need to look at a lot of material to think of other examples, but I am sure there are some. The Thunder Delta Slingers were absorbed by the Lunars, as the expanded Dara Happan Empire, as were the Char Un. 

 

On 1/15/2024 at 9:17 PM, Ageha said:

Similarly, I am discussing Pelorian the cultural population as specified in the canon books. 

Pelorian is a wide term, though, that incorporates the Dara Happans, Lodrili, rice farmers and Lunars, and probably more.

On 1/15/2024 at 9:17 PM, Ageha said:

The guide is explicitly clear on this. Southern Peloria is simply outright stated to be Orlanthi. 

Is it? Interesting.

On 1/15/2024 at 9:17 PM, Ageha said:

The Guide to Glorantha states outright that, canonically, there is no Pelorian cultural outside Peloria. That southern Peloria is Orlanthi culturally and not Pelorian. 

The various Sun Counties exist both inside and outside of Peloria and are definitely influenced by Pelorian culture.