The summaries in the previous three
posts do not disclose all of the galactic history revealed in Poul Anderson's Technic History. Although Ythrians, Merseians, Cynthians, Wodenites etc learned interstellar travel from human Technic civilization, Aycharaych, the sole Chereionite who serves Merseia, is the last survivor of the "Ancient" race whose interstellar civilization, possibly destroyed by a telepathic parasite, left mysterious buildings and inscriptions on many planets. Diverse religious hopes are focused on the Ancients and Fr Axor, a Wodenite Jerusalem Catholic and companion of Dominic Flandry's daughter, interprets and reads the inscriptions, seeking evidence for a second Incarnation.
Flandry defends the Empire, resists Merseia and opposes Aycharaych whose elaborate plot on the planet Aeneas, shortly after Flandry's expulsion of the Aenean rebels, was exposed by the Avalonian spy, Erannath.
I might by now have completed a summary of the main points of the Technic History to my own satisfaction but probably not.
17 comments:
Doesn't Aych CLAIM to be an Ancient, but "the proof's in the pudding"?
I'd more likely believe that our little Altaian friends are the Ancients.
In our timeline, we've invented the equivalent of the "slinker" which feeds back the emotions of people and intensifies them. It's called "Social Media"....
-kh
Kaor, Keith!
I would say, rather, that the Ice People of Altai belong to a different race as ancient as that of Chereion's. And the Ice People are certainly wiser, IMO, than Aycharaych.
Sean
Thank you Sean..... I wonder why Aych doesn't clone himself?
Also, our native Altaian friends could influence the aeromedusae and telepathically reach Terra.
An idea (totally NOT supported by the text):
Our Native friends say-
"A heat-plague upon these young whippersnapper races! They are very annoying, noisy, and messing up this part of the galaxy with their juvenile squabbling!"
"Have no fear- we can deal with that."
"How?"
"We will reach key beings through their dreams, and have their silly empires wear themselves out."
"Even the flying ones? We like the flying ones- they're pretty!"
"We will see..."
"But it will take hundreds of years!"
"That is but an instant in eternity;' we can 'chill' until then."
"Of course we can 'chill"- our bodies' temperature is below zero Centigrade!"
"That is not what we meant... Come, let us begin."
"But not the pretty flying ones?"
"Very well, not the pretty flying ones...."
Cheers,
KH
Kaor, Keith!
Now that was interesting thought you had: why didn't Aycharaych clone himself? Or did he, in the past? As Flandry said in A KNIGHT OF GHOSTS AND SHADOWS, we don't know old he was. Or did Aycharaych think any cloning of himself would be pointless if there were no FEMALES of his race with whom he and the clones could hope to have children by? Many questions can easily be thought of!
And I was amused by the hypothetical dialogue you suggested some of the Ice People might have had if they were that annoyed with the "young whippersnapper races." My only caveat being that the Ice People did not object to coming under the more or less nominal suzerainty of Terra, because the Empire would not have MENACED them as Merseia would have done.
Sean
Thank you, Sean. It's interesting how the human Altaians didn't menace the natives, as we have a very strong record of doing just that with technologically inferior people. Maybe our native friends conveyed through the shamans: "Let's be nice neighbors- we'll leave you alone and you leave us alone, or WE'LL MESS YOU UP!"
-KH
Kaor, Keith!
It will always remain true that a more technologically advanced culture WILL affect, both positively and negatively, less advanced societies. I think the best way to sometimes soften the impact of such a contact is when the more advanced society finds goods or resources the less advanced culture has and obtains them by trade. That would enable the more technologically backward culture to advance on terms its people UNDERSTANDS, as we see Old Nick doing on T'kela, in "Territory."
As for the people who became the Tebtengri Shamanate (not sure I got the name right), they and the Ice People had a mutual interest in cooperating to resist the aggressions from the Kha Khans in Ulan Baligh.
Btw, "A Message In Secret" happens to be the funniest of the Flandry stories. We see Poul Anderson having some good natured fun with Dominic Flandry, at the latter more "Bertie Woosterish" moments.
Sean
Thanks, Sean. Are you suggesting that economic colonialism usually benefits the technologically less-advanced societies? I think there are a few billion people who might disagree with you. Also: ()(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colonialism)
Liberalism, capitalism and colonialism
Classical liberals were generally in abstract opposition to colonialism (as opposed to colonization) and imperialism, including Adam Smith, Frédéric Bastiat, Richard Cobden, John Bright, Henry Richard, Herbert Spencer, H.R. Fox Bourne, Edward Morel, Josephine Butler, W.J. Fox and William Ewart Gladstone.[77] Their philosophies found the colonial enterprise, particularly mercantilism, in opposition to the principles of free trade and liberal policies.[78] Adam Smith wrote in The Wealth of Nations that Britain should grant independence to all of its colonies and also argued that it would be economically beneficial for British people in the average, although the merchants having mercantilist privileges would lose out.[77][79]
Them there's the "Resouce Curse"(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resource_curse):
The paradox that countries with an abundance of natural resources (such as fossil fuels and certain minerals), tend to have less economic growth, less democracy, and worse development outcomes than countries with fewer natural resources. There are many theories and much academic debate about the reasons for, and exceptions to, these adverse outcomes. Most experts believe the resource curse is not universal or inevitable, but affects certain types of countries or regions under certain conditions.[1][2]A 2011 study argues that previous assumptions that oil abundance is a curse were based on methodologies which failed to take into account cross-country differences and dependencies arising from global shocks, such as changes in technology and the price of oil. The researchers studied data from the World Bank over the period 1980–2006 for 53 countries, covering 85% of world GDP and 81% of world proven oil reserves. They found that oil abundance positively affected both short-term growth and long-term income levels.[96] In a companion paper, using data on 118 countries over the period 1970–2007, they show that it is the volatility in commodity prices, rather than abundance per se, that drives the resource curse paradox.[97][98]
-kh
Kaor, Keith!
No, I said TRADE and commerce, not "colonialism," whatever that word means. Nicholas van Rijn had no interest in setting up an empire. He wanted to explore, trade, get rich, and have fun.
Sean
Sean,
I think again that "colonialism" is a meaningful word. The colonialists use local labor, extract raw materials, disallow local enterprises that would compete with theirs and sell high-priced goods to the colony. One country gets rich at the expense of the other.
Paul.
Kaor, Paul!
But that sounds far more like 18th century Mercantilism, a policy for which a word like "colonialism" is not truly satisfactory.
Sean
Sean,
Well, ok. If we are agreed on the phenomenon, then the terminology is less important.
Paul.
Kaor, Paul!
But I think terminology does matter! I believe the accurate and correct use of words and terms is necessary to minimize confusion and misunderstanding. Think of how carelessly and inaccurately words such as "racism," "fascism," and "sexism" has been used. And "colonialism" probably should be added to the list.
Sean
Sean,
Terminology matters. If we establish that a particular disagreement is merely terminological, then we can clear it up.
The misuse of "fascism" is the most serious. Fascists are on the march in Europe and need to clearly identified so that everyone else can unite against them. I had to tell someone on the left, "Thatcher was not a fascist. She won three General Elections. She did not close down (or burn down) Parliament, ban all other political parties or imprison their leaders."
Paul.
Kaor, Paul!
But I think even you need to define "fascism" more carefully. Your friend Andrea at least calls himself a "fascist," and from what you said about him, would not behave in the bad ways you listed. Perhaps we should go back to defining "fascism" the way Mussolini did?
And I certainly agree with what you said about the late Margaret Thatcher.
Sean
Sean,
Andrea is one big anomaly on my horizon.
Words do extend and change their meanings. One parable changed the meaning of the phrase, "Good Samaritan," and there is now a group called the Samaritans who take phone calls from would-be suicides while the original Samaritans still exist out in Palestine.
"Fascism" has come to mean anti-democratic, pro-capitalist and violent, not necessarily but very often including the scapegoating of racial minorities. "Communism" came to mean Stalinism whereas it originally meant common ownership in whatever form.
Paul.
@ Sean:
"Nicholas van Rijn had no interest in setting up an empire. He wanted to explore, trade, get rich, and have fun."
If you mean a political empire, you're absolutely correct.
However, "empires" aren't just political, th y can be economic, as well ON (Old Nick) set up a MSC (Multi-System Corporation) empire. SSL seems like a cross between LVMH (the French luxury good manaufacturere) ands Sumiotomo (the Japans trading company).
You said: "He wanted to explore, trade (Are there spices and liquors he could but wouldn't trade?), get rich (did he plan to do this through increasing NI, ROI, market share,etc.? (probably not through M&A.)) and have fun (I wonder how many hours/week ON typically worked?)." This makes him sound a little like Ted Turner and Richard Branson.
RE: literal interpretation of terms: "For the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life." -2 Corinthians 3:6
21st Century Trade and Commerce or *Neo-Mercantilism?: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belt_and_Road_Initiative
-kh
*Maybe both
Kaor, Paul and Keith!
Paul: Yes, everyone who has read the New Testament knows of the Parable of the Good Samaritan and how THAT changed the word "Samaritan." Yes, I knew as well of how a remnant of the original Samaritans still survives in Israel. They are, in some ways, more orthodox than even Orthodox Jews!
And it's good a charitable group called "Samaritans" exists for talking would be suicides out of killing themselves.
But both "Fascism" and "Communism" disapproved of "capitalism" (a better term is "free enterprise economics"). Mussolini favored the state "incorporating" private enterprise INTO the state ("corporatism," altho "cartelization" is more accurate). Communism was nakedly in favor of the state owning most property or the means of production and distribution of goods and services. Neither has worked.
Keith: and I still repeat, Nicholas van Rijn had no interest in setting up any kind of empire. AND opposed the cartelization or merging of private enterprises like the Home Companies into the de facto control of the Solar Commonwealth that we see in MIRKHEIM
I don't understand what you mean by "NI" or "ROI," or "M&A." And Old Nick certainly liked to take it easy and have fun when he could! But, he worked very, very hard when he had to and was quite willing to risk his ringleted head when necessary!
Sean
Post a Comment