"'The glorious revolution was necessary,' Patel declared. 'Emperor Hans restored order and purged corruption.'
"'Ah, but his sons -'"
-The Game Of Empire, CHAPTER TWO, p. 220.
Of course a successful revolution is "glorious"!
"Treason doth never prosper, what's the reason?
"For, if it prosper, none dare call it Treason."
People are surprised when I tell them that our present British constitutional monarchy results from nothing less than a "Glorious Revolution" in 1688.
Patel speaks indiscreetly:
Naval personnel feel that the present Emperor has been badly, even treasonably, advised;
reform is overdue;
the Admiral has sent recommendations;
meanwhile, dissatisfaction and consequent restlessness might require him to declare martial law...
Another glorious revolution?
Or is it all just a "Game"?
6 comments:
Kaor, Paul!
Of course, all successful revolutionaries will claim their seizures of power were glorious and beneficial! (Snorts) In actuality, precious few revolutions were like that. Despite my distaste for the anti-Catholic bigotry motivating the politicians of 1688, the "Glorious" Revolution was a limited and partial exception to that rule, at least in the long term.
I agree with that saying of John Harington and copied it into my Andersonian notebook.
We live in a disgustingly illiterate age when it comes to knowledge of real history! I've read Hume and Churchill's British histories, plus works by other authors touching on the subject. The works of such writers, whatever their shortcomings, used to be standard reading!
Iow, Magnusson was preparing the groundwork for his fleet proclaiming him Emperor! Typical of ambitious would-be usurpers. At least Hans Molitor was a reluctant usurper.
Of course, it's a game, ambitious men craving and seeking power--with the added "bonus" of something even worse with Magnusson. If legitimacy breaks down within a state, any state, in whatever form, so that the old rules for how power should be transferred are no longer respected, you are always going to get increasingly violent power struggles. IWHBD.
Ad astra! Sean
Yeah, that's about the way it happened in the Roman Empire. The Emperor was first and foremost a soldier, and he had to watch out for military discontent.
Kaor, Mr. Stirling!
Too true! I recall your Antonine books that the Roman Empire was not a gov't with an army--it was an army with a gov't.
And that's simply not the way it should be! Far better for the armed forces of any State to have a bone deep conviction that their duty was to obey the orders of the civil authorities. Which is what I believe Artorius and Marcus Aurelius were trying to institutionalize in TO TURN THE TIDE and THE WINDS OF FATE.
Ad astra! Sean
Sean: Yes, though they had to proceed cautiously.
But at that point, there had been four peaceful transfers of power stretching over 80 years -- a very long lifetime by Roman standards. Marcus Aurelius will survive into his 80's, in that universe, and remain mentally acute to his dying day. And his son Verus will be a good emperor for a good long while, having been co-Emperor for more than decade before that.
The Roman Empire at its height was surprisingly decentralized. Local government (by bigwigs) took care of most of the business, and the central government was an appeals center but mostly handled Empire-wide peacekeeping and defense.
Of course, the Empire was just too -big- for the bureaucratic resources of the period to be over-centralized. Accounting was primitive, for example.
Also, the Americans subtly intervene in the education of heirs to the throne.
Kaor, Mr. Stirling!
Absolutely! Caution is always going to be necessary when it comes to constitutional/political "reform." It's so catastrophically easy to screw up. And that's a huge reason why I am so skeptical and distrustful of "radicals."
Those four peaceful transfers of power would be a good base for Marcus Aurelius and Artorius to build on. Your comments about that alternate Marcus and his son makes me even more keenly interested in your planned sequels.
I've been wondering when Artorius and his grad students might meet some second century Christians. Since Marcus Aurelius planned to repeal the anti-Christian laws, they could start emerging from hiding. Athenagoras of Athens and Irenaeus of Lyons were writing about that same time.
I like that decentralization. We need a civil service, except politicians can always find excuses for setting up mostly useless new agencies. I hope that tradition of decentralization survives.
I wonder how Artorius plans to "subtly intervene in the education of heirs to the throne." I don't think merely study of Aristotelian, Platonic, or Stoic philosophy will be enough, because most people will simply not be that interested.
Ad astra! Sean
Post a Comment