Vanarus, Machaka Lion Kings etc
 

Hello,

Is there a chance that some days those new nations are going to be implemented ? I know of Vanarus and Machaka Lion Kings but there might be others who were planned but were forgotten :(

Also there a few more kamis units which descriptions are in the files but the units themselves are not done, will they appear one day or another ?

Re: Vanarus, Machaka Lion Kings etc
 

I guess Kristoffer is still considering the idea of someday adding Muspelheim. If so, it probably won't be for a long time...

Re: Vanarus, Machaka Lion Kings etc
 

I'd heard of Vanarus (which really, should write itself), but Machaka Lion Kings? Seriously? Can't we get an African nation that is actually based on something from *Africa*? Machaka is already pretty bland and flavorless because its only theme is "Giant Spiders!!!1!1!!!one11!!1!", which has nothing to do with anything involving african mythology.

I confess, if this was Warcraft I wouldn't even bat an eye. But with the depth of many of the other nations, Machaka is outstandingly shallow. So the last thing we need is another poorly conceptualized machaka that seems to be based on a Japanese anime (ripped off by Disney to be an animated feature) more than anything else.

Re: Vanarus, Machaka Lion Kings etc
 

That's an awful lot of judgement based on a simple name, isn't it?

Re: Vanarus, Machaka Lion Kings etc
 

Actually, I get the strong impression that Machaka is based on the pulps. As in, King Solomon's Mines (or atleast Solomon Kane).

Not true to African mythology, ofcourse, but then neither is R'lyeh true to Lovecraft...

Re: Vanarus, Machaka Lion Kings etc
 

heck, instead of African mythology why not base it on the most famous warrior tribe of Africa, the Zulus? just like Mictlan is based on the Aztecs, Marignon on the Spanish Inquisition(with territorial mixture of France as well for some odd reason), etc. would certainly be a lot better than giant spiders and wannabe Greek Hoplites in the hot desert sun...

Re: Vanarus, Machaka Lion Kings etc
 

I'm with gregstrom on this. We should really try to tone the criticism down just a hair. Ideas about what you'd like to see are a lot better and more useful for a developer than just saying "I hate this idea".

Re: Vanarus, Machaka Lion Kings etc
 

Err... whut? What lore could possibly could be more african than the stories on Anansi the Spider? The originally west-african spider stories (usually featuring Anansi the Spider, who is part of the time spider and part of the time human), which have spread across the continent, to Caribbean and elsewhere (even USA) where people originally from Africa live. There simply is no theme more african than the spider them :)

While lions certainly live in Africa, there is not that well known (at least that I know of) stories and lore of lions. The lion stories are usually of european origins (like lets say, "Lion is the king of the jungle" (lions don't live in jungles)), in the african spider stories the Lion is usually one of the fools Anansi loves to make fun of most. Lions are revered (except in the Anansi stories, where the Lion is the pompous and gullible fool), but could somebody give an example of Lion lore of African origin?

Re: Vanarus, Machaka Lion Kings etc
 

Aside from the fact that Anansi is a god, not representative of some race of spiders, I might point out that one of the defining features of Anansi stories is he's a regular spider. Not a gigantic spider. People riding giant spiders has absolutely nothing to do with Anansi.

Re: Vanarus, Machaka Lion Kings etc
 

Giant African people riding tiny lions!

Re: Vanarus, Machaka Lion Kings etc
 

I like Machaka for what it is. I see the main problem being that it's the only official southern/western African Nation in the game. There's room for plenty more. Maybe as many as Asia.

Re: Vanarus, Machaka Lion Kings etc
 

There's nothing wrong with Machaka not being very accurate in correllation with african history/mythology. Abysia is totally fictitious and noone minds, so what's wrong with the devs making some (huge I know) creative liberties with Machaka. Sure there needs to be more southern african nations, and it would be nice to have one which displays the culture better, but there's no point in beating up on Machaka.

If it really bugs you, then mod a new machaka that suits your likings. Like what has been done for pythium.

Re: Vanarus, Machaka Lion Kings etc
 

I am reading my third novel from Mosambique now, and so far in all of them are plenty of mythological references.

One central theme is the constant interaction with the dead. They can be conjured, have to be taken care of and revered, they can protect or harm.

One of the stories centers about a man seeking power through the aid of the dead. He uses the help of a sorcerer and is granted great power by means of what would translate into fire and death magic. On the other hand there is his son, IIRC, who tries to protect, seeks the way of harmony or healing, acquiring skills in water, earth, air and maybe nature.

And there is this constant theme of cursing, divining the future, summoning spirits, the fear of the dead that still walk our lands and materialize in our dreams unless properly treated.

This is just off the top of my head without further research. Oh and there is this motif of a fanatic primitive warrior tribe fighting naked besides red? body paint that protects them from bullets (there was civil about thirty years ago). Their goal is to stop the marauding bandits and bring peace to the land.

I know there was more, some apocalyptic stuff, big world destroying monsters you know. That was by Paulina Chiziane (I hope I got the spelling right). The other I am just reading is by Mia Couto. I don't know if you can get a translation, I try to read the original to maintain my Portuguese. There are German translations, as far as I know. They make excellent reading, combining mythological aspects, folklore of the people, action, history of the 70s and 80s and social criticism.

Re: Vanarus, Machaka Lion Kings etc
 

One of the developers is a religions professor; He probably has more insight into the role spiders play in African mythology than the people who don't want spiders involved in the Machaka theme.

Re: Vanarus, Machaka Lion Kings etc
 

And, by the way, Haggard was pretty accurate about Zulu weapons. Maybe it wasn't a good decision from Dominions team to leave, say, two-ended spears out, but that's another story entirely.

Re: Vanarus, Machaka Lion Kings etc
 

BTW, in case anyone's interested, here's a link to Endoperez' mod for an Anansi pretender for Machaka:

http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/showthread.php?t=30603

Re: Vanarus, Machaka Lion Kings etc
 

Kristoffer may or may not add these nations at some point. He was intending to do something about EA Machaka, but then the Jomon updates sort of ran over that.

As far as Machaka goes, it has plenty of African mythology on it. EA would also have, though of a different bent, since it would likely concern itself with the earlier stuff (immortality, cloud people, the coming of death etc).

Vanarus, well, aside from two units that are already in the game, no idea what its status is.

Any possible updates are likely to be infrequent and random now that they are working on the new project, whatever it is.

Re: Vanarus, Machaka Lion Kings etc
 

Machaka has:
(1) no unique national summons
(2) nothing that doesn't look like an ignorant white man's exoticized concept of Africa.

Now, I'd love to be wrong, but the nation is *incredibly thin*, and I'm pretty sure that's due to a lack of mythological depth. Admittedly, Africa is really big, I'm sure I don't know about all or even most of the mythological traditions, but its #2 above that really gets me.

So for those of you saying it has plenty of African mythology in it - what? where? Because I'm not seeing it.

And just because one of them is a professor of religion does not make him an expert in every mythological system. There's a lot of them. And they aren't considered 'religions' - mythology is a separate field. Now, clearly he knows a lot about some mythological systems. And where he has expertise it shines through. Machaka, otoh, could have used more research.

Re: Vanarus, Machaka Lion Kings etc
 

Wrana: I'm not sure if you're referring specifically to 'King Solomon's Mines', and not his later works, but Haggard wasn't writing about the Zulu in that particular book. The weapons he described seem much more similar to Congolese throwing knives and Songe axes (which would have been appropriate for the Great Lakes region, which I believe is approximately the real world location of Kukuanaland in the novel.

I think there might also be the mention of swords (definitely present in 'Allan Quartermain'), which would also be appropriate to the region, and ofcourse spears, but then spears were ubiquitous in colonial Africa. There is also mention and use of chainmaille (possibly influenced by the chainmaille armour still used in Algeria in the 19th century? The Kabyles and others in that region, and the Morocco area, still used heavy swords, as well, known as flyssa, rather specifically for piercing/breaking chainmaille.), which was replicated by the 19th century Sheffield armourers in the second book--and which may have strongly influenced Tolkien's mithril chain armour.

J. R. R. Tolkien was very familiar with the works of H. Ryder Haggard, as was Robert E. Howard, and H. P. Lovecraft.
Haggard, along with Edward Plunkett, Lord Dunsany; is pretty much the grandfather of modern fantasy.

It's been a while since I read King Solomon's Mines, but as I recall, Umslopogas (the Zulu warrior--who by the way uses an exotic battleaxe of partially European manufacture, not an Assegai--the most famous specifically Zulu weapon) doesn't make an appearance until the sequal, "Allan Quartermain".

The "lost people" in 'Mines', the Kukuanas-while they did speak a dialect of Zulu-were pretty specifically differentiated from other African tribes (different skin colour--more reddish than black--etc.).

Re: Vanarus, Machaka Lion Kings etc
 

Squirrelloid:

Go right ahead list things that are missing from it, if it seems thin to you. Machaka has had a lot less focus on it than many other nations and it is more of an amalgamation of various African mythologies than a specific national mythology.

However, the focus on Death and Earth magic, the witch doctors, sorcerers etc all fit rather well. Many of the things appearing in Machaka are universal to African mythologies or large swathes of African mythologies even if it doesn't fit all of them.

If you think it sucks, start naming specifics, because I'm really tired of these vague references on how "it's not authentic, it's too generic, it's missing things" line. If you know what's missing, name it. I'm not averse to learning new things, but I'm certainly not going to go off on some Google hunt based on vague generalities. I'll rather reference my mythology books at home if it comes to that.

Re: Vanarus, Machaka Lion Kings etc
 

A list of what it is missing would require some idea of what it is supposed to include.

'God Mountain' is Ol Donyo L'Engai, also known as Mount Kenya, and sacred to the Maasai. Maasai also vaguely matches the basic infantry units to some degree. Note that the only animal I can find a mythological reference associated with that mountain is cattle (unsurprising, given the Maasai's close association with cattle). In fact, Ol Donyo L'Engai is important because that is where Engai gave the Maasai cattle.

Some simple things that could have been done to add more flavor:
-A Maasai warrior is called a Moran. (plural apparently Morani).
-A Maasai ritual leader (probably combination of mage and priest) is called a Laibon. Laibon's traditionally engage in shamanistic healing, divination, and prophecy (suggests S and N magic).
-In addition to the spear, Maasai also use a knife called a 'simi', and a throwing club called an Orinka that was accurate to great distances (100 meters according to wikipedia!).
-Lion hunting was a right of passage for Maasai warriors. Possibly differentiate infantry by having a more veteran option be a lion slayer or somesuch - graphics with a lion pelt (Maasai don't wear the lion's pelt like that, but it would give decent game visualization).
-Blacksmiths, known as il-kunono, are avoided because they make 'weapons of death'. Possibly an ostracized caste that is kept around by the rulers/god because they are useful. (Earth mage with forge bonus?)
-The Maasai have two gods: Engai and Olapa. Engai is a sun god and Olapa is a moon goddess, suggesting fire and astral magic for those dedicated to Engai, and some set of astral, death, nature, and/or blood magic for those dedicated to Olapa. Engai also created humans, and made them from a tree, so has some claim to nature magic.
-Cattle are sacred and the direct link to Engai. A sacred cattle unit is virtually required!

Some less simple things that could have been done:
-The Maasai believe that a buried corpse can poison the soil, and so only bury important leaders. Game mechanic - population under Machaka dominion doesn't bury corpses. (not moddable)
-A corpse that a scavenger refuses to eat is known as Ondilili or Oln'gojine and thought to have something wrong with it. Possibly a death-based summon or battlefield summon using them would be appropriate. (moddable)
-Maasai drink cow's blood for warmth and strength. Possibly a full battlefield spell that gives FR50, +strength, +morale, possibly only to machakan nationals (if such a thing is possible). (at least partially moddable)
-Maasai culture involves cattle raiding - possibly a remote unrest/attack spell. Ideally causes unrest and nets gold for casting nation. (partially moddable)
-The Maasai primary god, Engai, has a dual nature. Wikipedia puts it simply: "Engai Narok (Black God) is benevolent, and Engai Nanyokie (Red God) is vengeful". Battlefield spells based on invoking aspects of Engai are certainly imaginable.
-Developing the sacred cattle idea, and looking at the use of cow blood and logical blood-magic associated with Olapa-dedicated mages, perhaps a sacred capital only cow commander who produces blood slaves slowly, but Machaka cannot issue the bloodhunt order. (not moddable afaik).
-Of course, national blood spells (which may include those already proposed) would be a necessity since the blood theme running through this conception is a lot different than the usual blood magic in dom3.

Less Developed ideas
-The Maasai believe there are three groups of people. The Torrobo (hunter-gatherers), the kikuyu (cultivators), and themselves. Roles for the other two groups, either in the recruitable list, or at least in the lore, are certainly possible.
-Maasai believe each person is born with a guardian spirit, and in addition to protecting them during this life, that spirit will also judge them at death and take them to the appropriate afterlife.


I cannot explain giant spiders or armored hoplites or a cult of assassins based on the Maasai, and at present time do not know where such things come from.

Re: Vanarus, Machaka Lion Kings etc
 

Of course, this works off the assumption that Machaka has anything to do with the Maasai, which is dubious at best. Africa is big and has a lot of highly varied mythology, the lack of Maasai specific traits is hardly indicative of a failed nation concept.

Re: Vanarus, Machaka Lion Kings etc
 

It uses the Maasai holy site and Maasai-inspired warriors. Seems a better match than any other group i could think of, and covers all those aspects that I can match to *any* African culture I know of.

But as i started with, saying what's missing requires some idea of what its supposed to be. I can't tell from what's included in the game what it was supposed to be. Most of what I can't explain looks disturbingly like some 'darkest africa' or 'tarzan' idea of Africa.

Edit: Ooh, i found a myth that involves spiders who can turn into people. Of course, its Japanese... (see Tsuchigumo).

Re: Vanarus, Machaka Lion Kings etc
 

Thank you for the detailed post. :)

Interesting stuff. Also decidedly different from several West African myths in some respects, though I expect some commonality. Machaka does have some of the dark Africa things going for it, but a lot of the things in it fit that plus a mixture of West African mythologies.

I must admit that my reading on those is rather cursory. I will try to find the time this week to look into the things I have previously perused and analyze them in more detail, because the effort you went into deserves a response in kind.

Re: Vanarus, Machaka Lion Kings etc
 

I agree that you could do a totally different African-themed nation based on cultures that practice Voodun. However, my knowledge is insufficient to do that justice at present (especially since its complicated by large regional variation as to what comprises Voodun, and confusion caused by american myths about Voodun).

Re: Vanarus, Machaka Lion Kings etc
 

Since Edi's asking, here are a few things I think could be improved with Machaka:

One think I wish Machaka would do would be to more fully embrace Ashanti mythology. The connection between an African Nation utilizing spiders, and Anansi the spider-god (who originated in Ashanti myth), is pretty obvious on the face of things, but it's also portrayed rather vaguely and tentatively.

They use/are related to spiders, they're African.

A third step into "they're the Ashanti myth of Anansi, through the lens of a historically-based fantasy strategy game" is never really taken, and I think that is part of the reason they come off as a bit of a steriotype. It wouldn't be impossible to change just a very few details, and end up with a South American Nation riding Goliath bird-eating spiders, or Australian Aborigines riding funnelweb spiders, or Laotian Giant huntsman spiders, particularly since tarantulas are American in origin (the word "tarantula" was first coined by American colonists for the funnel web tarantula, and tarantulas range from the Caribbean to South America.

If Machaka were Caribbean in origin, they would make a lot more sense, thematically, since the myth of Anansi was carried into the Caribbean by African slaves. Caribbean flavours could then be added to the Nation, giving it a stronger and more defined "theme".

Another problem is that you've got a Middle Ages Nation using what amounts to an Early Ages sacred unit (big, powerful, expensive), without a very good reason for them to be incorporated into that Nation's armed forces, and without corresponding Middle Ages technology (no crossbows, little armour).

If they're going to remain Ashante, Machaka might be given an Asantehene "king" unit, who would wear a soulwasher's badge, which would give them strong protection against demons and the undead, up until they were first struck in battle (1 HP Firstform, second form lacks the soulwasher's badge).

Okomfo Anokye was a powerful priest and co-founder of the Ashanti Nation, who occupied the positions of both Nation Founder, and Lawgiver, and who occupies a "Merlin-like" position in Ashanti legend:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Okomfo_Anokye
Apparently (from what I could tell from the article), he had mystical power over the earth.
Having a 3 Holy/3 Earth hero would give Machaka a boost.

The other co-founder of Ashanti was Osei Tutu, who was a great warrior, and who possessed mystical amulets and body armour that were proof against missles--when he left them at home on a raid, this proved his undoing. So, you might have a strong (human) warrior who comes pre-equipped with an amulet that protects 100% against missles.

A nice heroic unit to give them from Ashanti legend would be the sacred Golden Stool, a unit that might give them a strong banner, a patrol bonus, holy magic, blood magic, etc. Whatever seems to best fill any percieved gaps. The Golden Stool is such a significant and sacred cultural item that the Ashanti have been known to go to war just to protect it's sanctity.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashanti#Ashanti_Kingdom

Another heroic unit to give them could be the two golden masks of Adinkra, which were made from a golden stool that Adinkra, the king of Gyaaman, had made to replicate the Ashanti stool. The Ashanti defeated Gyaaman, beheaded Adinkra, and then made two masks in the shape of Adinkra's "ugly face". They now hang on either side of the Ashanti stool, to this day. They might come with banners and high Fear, and be intended to "lead the way" at or close to the front lines.

Re: Vanarus, Machaka Lion Kings etc
 

I dunno.

It's not like there is some kind of stereotype about Africa being known for hoplites sporting overly encumbering plate hauberks, or full plate wearing assassins

Re: Vanarus, Machaka Lion Kings etc
 

ok, i agree, those are just weird. Its the giant spiders that feel like a europeanized idea of african beliefs.

Re: Vanarus, Machaka Lion Kings etc
 

If you're talking Maasai, why not make it East Africa in general and tie the spiders and sorcerors into the shetani?

Re: Vanarus, Machaka Lion Kings etc
 

Hey, Shetani cult's a great idea! Better for East Africa than West, though (and I really feel there should be atleast one clearly Western African Nation), but East Africa is really interesting.

I'd probably base it on Zanzibar/Tanzania, rather than Ethiopia, simply because there's plenty going on in East Africa for atleast 2 decent Nations, and those two areas would make a nice division.

For instance, you could draw from Khoisan (Bushmen) and the Ku****e Kingdom for EA, with Shetani cult mysticism, along with some "King Solomon's Mines"/coast of Zinj/mild Jewish influences, in the MA, and an LA of Arab and Portuguise flavour, sprinkled with Indian spice (trade), all centered around a great city of Zanzibar.

Re: Vanarus, Machaka Lion Kings etc
 

K U S H I T E

for all those who haven't guessed it. And those seem like cool ideas honeybadger.

Re: Vanarus, Machaka Lion Kings etc
 

I lol'd.

Re: Vanarus, Machaka Lion Kings etc
 

Censorship is bad, M'kay?

Re: Vanarus, Machaka Lion Kings etc
 

To anyone interested in the history of Africa I would like to recommend a book:

Black Mother by Basil Davidson. It's a curious book - it doesn't read like a history book. It's not a listing of kings, dates and battles. It describes processes, cause and effect. It focuses on effects of slave trade in Africa, as opposed to Europe and America as it's usually done. It's full of many interesting things, including ancient "black" kingdoms of Kongo, Kush which thrived centuries before colonialism. It took 5 hundred years of slave trading to corrupt Africa and bring it to its knees. Prior to that Europeans treaded Africa with respect, and were simply unable to establish any military bridgehead. One of points it makes is that blacks' inferiority is an effect of successful propaganda of slave traders.

Can anyone recommend me interesting books about Africa ? Including fantasy ? Conan is kind of nice, but in these books blacks are always slaves or servants and don't govern themselves.

Re: Vanarus, Machaka Lion Kings etc
 

Alan Dean Foster's Into the Out Of is quite fun, maybe try that?

Re: Vanarus, Machaka Lion Kings etc
 

B0rsuk, try looking for Charles R Saunders' 'Imaro' trilogy.

Also, if anyone's interested, I'm still (slowly) working on 2 Africa-themed mod Nations. One based on Ethiopia/Aksum, and another that's kind of a mess of influences, but directly inspired by the African slave trade, West African mythology, and the abovementioned 'Imaro' trilogy.

Re: Vanarus, Machaka Lion Kings etc
 

John Thornton's Africa and Africans is a modern classic, and a bit of an "antidote" to the theory you suggested above. Thorton argues that Africans retained an enormous amount of "agency" in dealing with Europeans. He also argues that the slave trade did no more lasting damage to African society on the whole as an out break of plauge would have. Furthermore, there were winners and losers in the slave trade within Africa, and some nations arguably came out ahead in the transactions. Obviously, there is a lot in his book, for example he discusses slaves in New World colonies.

Hmmm... this has inspired me to suggest a Late Age nation, a colonial one based on Atlantic World theory. Probably a blend of Machaka, Marignon, and Mictlan. One of its capital sites is called the Grand Plantation, which provides resources, blood slaves, and wealth.

Can anyone else dig it?

Re: Vanarus, Machaka Lion Kings etc
 

Thanks everyone for recommendations. And as for this one...

I guess I'll check it out, if only because it sounds so different from Black Mother. Black Mother cites numerous examples of black people governing themselves, rebelling (some painted them as unable to take any action) being treated as equals by European monarchs, shows examples of sophisticated purely African culture and pieces of art. Curiously, pieces of art get cruder and cruder with time, illustrating degeneration. Some of the points the book makes:

Slave trade was for most part volountary, at least in the beginning. Capturing slaves by force was quite rare. Later, Africa was unable to stop it. Even when African rulers wanted to stop it, it was too late. If you didn't trade, your neighbors did. Not only would they become wealthy, but would get superior weapons and would invade you. So it wasn't just slave trade, it was also weapon trade, one of dirties trades there is. Some desperate peoples like those in the delta of Kongo sought to take advantage of that and armed themselves. They would only trade if they'd get at least 1 rifle per 1 slave. They were getting stronger and more fortified and were finally able to resist Europeans. Basil Davidson cites this - Africans arming themselves and finally resisting - as a factor contributing to the start of colonialism. No more profit without using force. Of course, Industrial Revolution running out of steam was still the main reason.

- slave trade had a long tradition in Africa, but most slaves would usually assimilate. They had more freedom than in Europe or America, could marry etc. This isn't strange if you realize there was no skin color difference. Meanwhile in America you'd be instantly recognized as different and a slave. In Africa it was blacks among blacks. Imagine many Africans thought Europeans were cannibals !

- about lasting damage: Basil Davidson says the damage was huge and backs it up. First, it isolated "countries". Those at the shore would guard it jealously. The trade was dominated by kings and wealthiest merchants - they had a monopoly. People fought over access to shores so they could trade. And they started wars to capture slaves and fuel the trade. It made Africans hate each other, or more accurately other tribes. Surely wars can cause lasting damage ?

- Africans had a feudal system, but it was too different for Europeans to recognize. It was a tribal feudal system, you had a hierarchy of tribes instead of individuals.

Re: Vanarus, Machaka Lion Kings etc
 

B0rsuk, did you get my PM?

And one of the reasons African slaves were so popular in America, was actually because of their skin colour. As suggested above, they were instantly recogniseable as atleast potential slaves, which made them a lot easier to recapture, if they tried to escape. And being from Africa, they would have little support system (atleast until the abolitionist movement started taking off), if they did manage to escape successfully.

There were white slaves in America, and many more "indentured servants", who were more or less temporary (for up to a decade or more) slaves-by-contract. The Spanish had also enslaved the natives of South America, but so many died, or escaped (a lot easier to run for the nearest mountain, than to swim to Africa, although many African slaves did escape to join Native American tribes).

It was also probably a little easier for some slaveholders to ignore and stomach the horrors of slavery, if you were inflicting it on someone so clearly foreign.

Re: Vanarus, Machaka Lion Kings etc
 

Furthermore, there were wage-slaves once industry picked up. The big advantage of skin tone based slavery was the ability to call it the natural order of things, and take advantage of descendants as further slaves. Sure, there were places that rarely happened, bu that was usually due to slaves being cheap commodities in those places. Brazil for instance largely cut out the chain of middle men, and had cheaper voyages to and from Africa, so slaves there were cheap, expendable commodities. Which sucked something awful.

Re: Vanarus, Machaka Lion Kings etc
 

Interesting stuff there, HoneyBadger. Speaking of other sources of slaves, European rulers avoided Arabs on purpose. The reason: religion ! Islam would unite slaves, they could organize and fight for freedom. Even worse, they might be able to spread the religion.

Now that I've read the book I have an interesting observation. It appears the most intolerant, xenophobic religions are the monotheistic ones. Greeks, Romans* simply added gods to their pantheons, at least until they converted to Christianity. The intolerance granted by monotheistic Christianity and Islam made them strong factors in uniting people (often using very brutal or very devious measures, but that's not the point). Now I'm thinking about modeling these things in a game like Civilization or preferably Master Of Magic. They could make interesting, or at least fresh game mechanics. I would include shamanism (belief in minor, local deities rather than a number of strong global ones a.k.a. polytheism) and atheism.

* Romans and Chinese are good examples of major powers who avoided mixing religion and government. Apparently it can be done.

I was absent so I had no chance to read your PM, HoneyBadger. The good news is the time was well spent, and apparently I've seen a badger, who was cool enough to escape the wheels despite maintaining a leisurely pace.

Re: Vanarus, Machaka Lion Kings etc
 

I do not think this does a good job in describing the origins of slavery in the New World. Long story short, a handful of crops proved to be so profitable that plantations owners did whatever the hell it took to get bodies to work the fields. Sugar was by far the most important of these crops, and something like 80% of all slaves brought to the New World. So why Africans? Because the Portuguese set up a trade network on the African coast, and found buying slaves from other Africans to be more reliable than subjugating the natives on the Canary islands. This precedent set, others followed and it kept proving cheaper and more reliable than any other form of labor. If you want to trace the origins of slavery, economics illuminates the way. I think the dehumanizing racism that followed very quickly (within 50 years in the case of Barbados) is better explained as an after the fact justification for working hundreds of slaves to death to make sugar.

Borsuk, you are all kinds of wrong here. You do know that the Romans persecuted and martyred thousands of Christians? The exact offense was usually refusing to burn an offering to the Emperor. That is neither tolerant, nor seperating governance from religion. And for that matter, "intolerant and xenophobic" are great words to describe the Chinese throughout history. Actually, they probably describe 95% of all human societies. Christianity and Islam are both exceptions that argued all humans could earn divine favor by joining the faith. Well, Islam was harder on women. However, Christianity gave women an enormous amount of equality. If you look at some of the big name converts to Christianity, they often had mothers or wives who converted before them and played a large role in their conversion (Constantine's mother was Christian, for example). I do not think monotheism lends itself to this kind of unity on its own face. Judaism, for example, puts an enormous emphasis on its adherents being "God's chosen," or a special people apart from the rest. They further emphasized these differences with strict labor, dietary, and bodily alteration.

Long story short, history is complicated. Especially when dealing with over 2,000 years of it. Just think about how quickly things have changed in the past 100 years. The ancient world was not any more stable, we modern observers looking back upon it just tend to clump and generalize more.

Re: Vanarus, Machaka Lion Kings etc
 

I think he was making a different point.

Example: the problems Romans had with Christianity was not that it introduced a new god, its that they denied the other gods. As long as everyone was pantheistic, Rome could care less who *else* you worshipped. But first you had to render unto caesar what was caesar's. Christians refused to worship other gods, hence the problem. Its a totally different kind of intolerance, since its hardly afraid of what's different. What its afraid of is exclusivity.

Where monotheism tends towards xenophobia follows immediately from your 'everyone could earn divine favor by joining the faith' - namely, if you didn't join the faith, you were an unperson.

Also, I don't think i'd hold up Christianity with being notably pro-woman. Women arguably were at least as well off in Roman society pre-Christianity as post. And the church has been remarkably hostile to women even into the present day. (I know the catholic church doesn't permit women to be priests, and i'm pretty sure the orthodox church is the same. Protestantism is a mere 400+ years old, and its more liberal treatment of women has everything to do with attitudes during the reformation and age of enlightenment, not christianity per se.) And lets not forget that woman is blamed for 'original sin' in Christianity, which is arguably worse from a social attitude standpoint than anything in Islam.

Re: Vanarus, Machaka Lion Kings etc
 

One point stressed by Black Mother is that it was really 3 transactions. First they took cheap manufacture products, fabric etc and bought slaves with them. This was already very profitable. Then they sold the slaves to colonies in the New World. Finally, they sold the spices and stuff back. Year after year after year it provided in over 300% return of investment. Not to say what you said is wrong, just not complete.


True, but I have to wonder why were Christians persecuted ? Why did they grow stronger than most other religions ? I don't know the historic context, but I don't think this is necessarily at odds with what I said earlier. One of most basic Christian dogma is there's only one god. That's inherently intolerant. I wish I knew more of religions of the time. One book I read about Romans said they wouldn't persecute other religions if they were not a threat to the state. I don't rule out that Jesus was indeed a troublemaker. And frankly, some of the stuff attributed to him (like accepting and not defending against any aggression) is plain stupid and immoral in my view.

Yet two wrongs don't make a right. The Chinese managed to keep their government free of religion by being more intolerant themselves.

Oh, that's the tip of the iceberg. To make people dislike each other, it's enough to artificially divide them into two groups. That's what one scientific paper said anyway.

Do you know how farmers deal with baboons in Africa ? They catch the cheekiest baboon using a bait. Then they paint him white, and set him free. Once the pack sees him, the response ranges between ostracism and murder. A white baboon will never be accepted, yet he can't understand what's wrong with him. This method is illegal.

Another of my hypotheses:
the most popular religions are the most kind ones, in the sense they declare the most kindness to others. Look what happened to Aztecs. Voodoo still exists by some miracle, but as a curiosity.

Sounds reasonable. The equality granted to women could be one of the main offending factors (why share if you don't have to ?). No, this isn't caused my monotheism alone, but supports my hypothesis that Christianity was disliked because it threatened the old order. The cult of Priapus would never be seen as a threat.

In my opinion the only reason why Judaism is no longer one of the warring religions is because they've been kicked so hard. Of course there's Israel/Palestine, but it never came near the scale of crusades or jihad.

Another thing: we know little about the ancient world, it appears simpler due to lack of information.

Re: Vanarus, Machaka Lion Kings etc
 

I don't think so. The most popular religions include christianism, which was forced upon people by burning them alive if they wouldn't convert, Islam, which was spread by jihad, buddhism, which although peaceful was spread in not-so-peaceful ways by f.e. Asoka in Inida, Hinduism, which is not very nice to a lot of Hindus...
The most popular religions were spread by religious or secular leaders in a warlike way.
Christianism may have supplanted Roman and other polytheisms out of kindness, but it's probably more due to the fact it offered a heaven after death that's much more appealing than that of the Greeks: In the Odyssey, the ghosts all regret their former lives, even if they are in the Elysean fields, whereas Paradise is the top best place to live in, and you can hope to be happy in the afterlife. Kindness may not matter much here.
Then crhistianism became dominant by becoming intolerant and outlawing other religions, and by forcefully converting whoever they met.

I also think polytheism isn't jsut about adding gods, but assimilating them. Herodotus for instance will talk of Ares when he describes the god of war of another nation. Does it mean he uses a familiar name to help his readers understand, or does he think it's the same god his readers know? I don't know.

Re: Vanarus, Machaka Lion Kings etc
 

That, and scaring the hell out of these who dont worship their God. Islam does the same, of course.
- Jesus loves you! Love him back or burn in Hell!
:)

Re: Vanarus, Machaka Lion Kings etc
 

Actually, there's a hell you don't want to go to in most religions. Tartarus for the Greeks, Hel for the Norse... The Hindus have one too. Christians, and muslims afterwards, offered a paradise to everyone. Hell was more of a tool of the church to force teh faithful to act according to the church wishes.

Re: Vanarus, Machaka Lion Kings etc
 

Let me respectfully disagree.
While there's some bad place in most religions, there are different conditions for going there. For example, Hel was reserved for these who didnt die in combat, afaik. No matter what, you go to Hel if you didnt die in combat, and you go to Valhalla if you were a brave warrior and died with a weapon in your hand. Greek Tartarus was for these who sinned heavily (not just your everyday greed and lust). For example, you were a pretender god who denied the previous Pantocrator. Etc etc.

And only Christians/Muslim 'send' to their Hell these who didnt convert to their God. AFAIK, if they are to be believed, even the most rightous nonbelievers will be tortured for all the eternity just because they didnt accept the one and true Faith and didnt pray to the one and true God 4-5 times per day on their knees.
Thats some punishment if you ask me. :) It probably has something to do with these religions success - maybe as much as the swords of their adepts. Fear is a powerful factor.
(What a joke must be to choose one of these religions only to find out that you guessed wrong and thus go to hell.)
:)

Re: Vanarus, Machaka Lion Kings etc
 

Islam is slightly more conflicted on the 'non-believers' part than Christianity. There's at least one Sura which claims that 'people of the book' (Christians and Jews) can achieve paradise, because they do worship the true god. Of course, there are also passages which imply the converse, so as I said, conflicted. Christianity, by comparison, is very much 'believe or fry'.

(Actually, this gets to the heart of a difference between the religions. Islam is not about belief in the way Christianity is. Its about submission to God and refusing the path of hubris - that you can get along without God. Orthopraxy is far more important than orthodoxy.)

Re: Vanarus, Machaka Lion Kings etc
 

The Romans were tolerant of *old* religions, in which they practiced Syncretism. Christianity really had problems once the Jewish nation convinced the authorities that Christianity wasn't a "Jewish" movement, it was a new religion.

Christianity was very pro-women for its time. Not necessarily in practice, but in doctrine, women being the first to find the empty tomb was a very big deal back then, because if you wanted something believed, then a man had to say it was true. Ephesians 5:22 (so often quoted in Christian weddings saying "wives submit to your husbands") was actually revolutionary because wives did that anyway, but to tell men that they had to be loving and caring to their wife was exceptional, as a Roman man could divorce his wife for any reason.

I think you'll find that almost every "category" of person has some skeletons if they've been around for a few hundred years, much less a few thousand. Sure Christians and Muslims did some not-so-nice things, but so have atheists, scientists, Americans, Germans, Japanese, Ottomans, etc etc etc.