Backstage - OOC Forums

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Sansha Kuvakei was an industrial mogul before founding his Nation? Moar here.

Pages: [1] 2

Author Topic: The nature of the Scriptures and the nature of the Clergy.  (Read 4501 times)

lallara zhuul

  • Now with rainbows and butterflies.
  • Veteran
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1123

As stated in various sources and discussed in various threads across the EVEverse the nature of the Scriptures has been determined as a collection of religious, historical, scientific, medical and political writings.

Would it not be logical to assume that the nature of the clergy within the Empire would reflect this multifaceted perception of religion, or life in itself?

Discuss.

I will give more input later, now its hunting time.
Logged

Be the Ultimate Ninja! Play Billy Vs. SNAKEMAN today!

Casiella

  • Demigod
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3723
  • Creation is so precious, and greed so destructive.

Does this imply that scientists and historians, or at least some subset, make up a significant portion of the clergy?

Throughout history, that model has worked many times. Monks from many different religious backgrounds have served as librarians, research scientists, mathematicians, and of course historians. I see no reason why at least some monastic orders within the Amarrian belief system couldn't continue that tradition.
Logged

lallara zhuul

  • Now with rainbows and butterflies.
  • Veteran
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1123

I entertain the notion that in the Amarrian culture all those different sciences are actually part of the religion, since they are part of the Scriptures.

Therefore all the clergy have some education on all those different areas of expertise.

Which would also mean that the word 'religion' would be interchangeable with all those different concepts that other Empires work with because to an Amarrian they would all be the same.

Making the Empire more of a lateral thinker in the terms of different sciences instead of linear like in other Empires.
Explaining why the advancement of certain sciences is slow in the Empire because the advancement is done across the whole scientific landscape, instead of specializing on just few fields of advancement.
(Before applying a new advancement in one field into the society it is methodically studied through all the other sciences to see its effect on the whole, then a decision is made is it applied or not.)

Basically meaning that the 'clergy' are actually pretty close to the lateral thinkers of the renaissance age.

Just to take it one step further.

I posit the idea that all the negative aspects that other cultures perceive in the Empire have not developed to be so in the Empire because of close mindedness or lack of vision, but because of true enlightenment of thought.

The Empire is perceived as 'evil' because it has developed into what it is laterally, instead of linearly(?) like the other Empires in the cluster.
Logged

Be the Ultimate Ninja! Play Billy Vs. SNAKEMAN today!

Louella Dougans

  • \o/
  • Demigod
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2222
  • \o/

So, a (sufficently qualified as to be allowed to act independently) priest would have a wealth of theoretical knowledge on any given subject?

Enough so, to as be able to act as the equivalent of a lecturer of undergraduate students?

And say, in a village/town, if someone needs a doctor, architect, engineer, vet, chemist, etc, then they'd ask the priest, and the priest would be able to direct tradespeople to do what is necessary?


Edit: The thing about a priest being a theoretical expert on anything/everything, and directing people to do tasks, might then tend to explain why the Ni-Kunni integrated so well, and why the True Amarr find certain professions distasteful.
« Last Edit: 03 May 2010, 13:41 by Louella Dougans »
Logged
\o/

lallara zhuul

  • Now with rainbows and butterflies.
  • Veteran
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1123

Yes.
Yes.
And Yes.

Basically what I would be talking about as a possibility is the fact that the priests of the Holy Amarrian Church would be kind of like the missionaries of old.
The Jesuits would be closer to what I am thinking about when it comes to Amarrian clergy.

Of course with the Empire being as large as it is, being as byzantine as it is, having room for orders doing just that would be a certainty.
Logged

Be the Ultimate Ninja! Play Billy Vs. SNAKEMAN today!

Jikahr

  • Egger
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 177
  • Grumpy Cat Amarr

I entertain the notion that in the Amarrian culture all those different sciences are actually part of the religion, since they are part of the Scriptures.

Therefore all the clergy have some education on all those different areas of expertise.

Which would also mean that the word 'religion' would be interchangeable with all those different concepts that other Empires work with because to an Amarrian they would all be the same.

Making the Empire more of a lateral thinker in the terms of different sciences instead of linear like in other Empires.
Explaining why the advancement of certain sciences is slow in the Empire because the advancement is done across the whole scientific landscape, instead of specializing on just few fields of advancement.
(Before applying a new advancement in one field into the society it is methodically studied through all the other sciences to see its effect on the whole, then a decision is made is it applied or not.)

Basically meaning that the 'clergy' are actually pretty close to the lateral thinkers of the renaissance age.

Just to take it one step further.

I posit the idea that all the negative aspects that other cultures perceive in the Empire have not developed to be so in the Empire because of close mindedness or lack of vision, but because of true enlightenment of thought.

The Empire is perceived as 'evil' because it has developed into what it is laterally, instead of linearly(?) like the other Empires in the cluster.

I don't perceive the Amarr empire to be entering into the true enlightenment of thought. I think that the priesthood, as they were in the middle ages, were more of an administrative body that handled bureaucratic affairs.

That's why Amarr is still a feudal state, and why the society takes ages to develop. 'Slow and plodding, like their ships'.

The religious side of it is mostly window dressing for a hierarchy based on wealth and backed by power. Of course, ultimately the Priests still have control. They would be responsible for food inspection, road repair, pretty much everything administrative. Some priests might also be scientists, and some scientists might be more like technicians following the orders of the priests.

However, yes there is a lot of religious discussion, philosophical insights, great works of art and so on happening in the Empire. Yet, there is still the threat of being arrested and tortured for heresy. That means that some ideas which the Amarrian Orthodox church considers as 'doctrine' might never be questioned, such as slavery for example.

It seems that with Naupilus becoming a Blood Raider, the Duchess Odelya becoming a Tetrimon, and the Empress of Amarr cloning her flesh, there might be a bit of a cultural or religious reformation shaking up the empire.

 I like to compare this with the 99 Reformations of Martin Luther and the creation of the Protestant church...so I suppose it is somewhat like the renaissance....and also like the Inquisition.
Logged
Currently training Verbosity to level V.

Lyn Farel

  • Guest

Priests in the middle ages were bureaucrats ?  :eek:

What are you referring to exactly ? The only 'bureaucracies' of the middle ages I know of are a few administrative monarchies / republics, and those were handled by secular powers...

Also slavery matters get actually questioned all the time in the TC circles (and probably in lower social levels as well). It happened under Heideran VII with the imperial edict on slaver raids outside of the Empire, it happened under Doriam II around the treatment reserved to slaves (iirc), it happened under Jamyl when it came to the morality of TCMCs.

One should not think that because the Amarr Faith is rigid and looks monolithic that there should not be any questioning. That's what is interesting here actually : it is not proper to question everything in the open. That is seen extremely negatively by the Amarr society. It is seen as a will to dissent and destabilize the society and its sacred order as a whole.

But imperials edicts happen all the time, and the TC debates and discuss about religious matters all the time (after all everything is about religion to the Amarr). I am pretty confident that Amarr society and culture is also extremely fond of theological and epistemology civilized discussions and debates in some areas where it is proper to do so.
Logged

Jikahr

  • Egger
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 177
  • Grumpy Cat Amarr

Priests in the middle ages were bureaucrats ?  :eek:

What are you referring to exactly ? The only 'bureaucracies' of the middle ages I know of are a few administrative monarchies / republics, and those were handled by secular powers...

Clergy = Cleric = Clerk

Bureaucracy --> Bureau (or 'desk' in French)

The only people that could read and write in the Middle ages were Catholic priests. All the books were in Latin. Even Kings and the nobility of the middle ages were often illiterate, which is why they had scribes.

The Catholic church oversaw the construction and maintenance over most of the infrastructure in Europe at this time, and by infrastructure I mean roads. Well okay, the Roman empire built the roads and the Catholic church made sure the roads were maintained. Part of maintenance was keeping the roads free from brigands and thieves.

The Church ran the Universities, Hospitals, law courts and so on. They created the Julian calendar, kept the records and so on. The Catholic church, as well as the Pope, was the highest authority in Europe for at least a thousand years.

So this is what I mean when I say (medieval) Priests were the bureaucrats. Who else knew how to read and write?

Also, just as the medieval Catholic church kept the Roman roads in order, it was the Amarrians who were the first to reactivate and use the jump gate artifacts.

Also, I know of no republics in medieval Europe.

Quote
Also slavery matters get actually questioned all the time in the TC circles (and probably in lower social levels as well). It happened under Heideran VII with the imperial edict on slaver raids outside of the Empire, it happened under Doriam II around the treatment reserved to slaves (iirc), it happened under Jamyl when it came to the morality of TCMCs.


I would imagine slavery gets questioned all the time. Humans have been questioning slavery for as long as the institution has existed. I think that Socrates (or another Greek philosopher) called for slavery to be abolished, but the question at the time was 'to be replaced with what'?

It's interesting, since the first Engineer in history, a man named 'Hero' in 50 B.C., invented the first steam turbine. He thought it would be useful for opening temple doors, but speculated on other uses for it. Why didn't the Industrial revolution begin until 1700 years later? Slaves. The slave training houses created an uproar about how such a machine might put an end to slavery...and then what would become of all those unemployed slaves?

The same thing happened in the United States under Antediluvian slavery. The northern states were industrialized, the Southern states were agricultural. The moral question of slavery was hotly debated for a century or more, with priests referring to scripture to either support slavery or contest it. It wasn't until the invention of the cotton gin however, that slavery became financially ineffective.

Which is what is happening in Amarr it seems. Slavery as an institution is dwindling, since machines are cheaper, safer (won't revolt), more dependable, etc. The only reason to maintain slavery is because it is mentioned in the scriptures, and of course because of the Holders (plantation owners) would lose a lot of money. Otherwise, everything the slaves do could be done by machines. Personally, I imagine that the Gallente use Androids the same way Amarrians use slaves. 

Quote
One should not think that because the Amarr Faith is rigid and looks monolithic that there should not be any questioning. That's what is interesting here actually : it is not proper to question everything in the open. That is seen extremely negatively by the Amarr society. It is seen as a will to dissent and destabilize the society and its sacred order as a whole.

Perhaps, but if we consider that the Amarrian religion is based upon/ modeled after the Catholic church, some questions you ask might end up with a visit by the Inquisition and end with torture and execution.

There is doctrine, and the doctrine is not to be questioned. Otherwise, how can you explain the existence of the Amarrian Apocrypha?

Of course, there are many offshoots of the Amarrian orthodox church. Those offshoots wouldn't exist if no one questioned their religion. Some sects are considered heretical, some aren't. Some may even be considered to be Apostasy ('heathen').

Also, in medieval Europe the Catholic monks of Ireland would sometimes openly make fun of and insult the Pope, in writing. They deemed it safe to do so because Ireland was such a backwater that the Pope would never consider sending his forces after them. This was not the case in Italy of course, where people such as Michelangelo asked for payment for murals in advance, took the money and ran. The Pope had to send his guard to arrest Michelangelo and force him to paint the Sistine chapel under house arrest.

That happened on one continent on one planet. In a culture that spans over thousands of planets, yes of course there is bound to be some questioning and discussion of scripture and dogma.

After all, the PF describes Amarr as a 'Feudalistic patchwork bogged down by bureaucracy, where the Divine Emperor's word is law, but the Emperor must be there in person to enforce these laws'. 

I suppose this point in Amarrian history could be compared to the protestant reformations in Europe. Amarrians are beginning to question long held and once cherished beliefs, such as the cloning of the Imperial person, the institution of slavery, etc. 

Quote
But imperials edicts happen all the time, and the TC debates and discuss about religious matters all the time (after all everything is about religion to the Amarr). I am pretty confident that Amarr society and culture is also extremely fond of theological and epistemology civilized discussions and debates in some areas where it is proper to do so.

Perhaps, but who except the TC and the scholars that have access to the scriptures would be qualified to discuss them authoritatively?

After all, the scriptures are not just one book, but several hundred or thousands of books compiled into a library. Amarrian priests would essentially be lawyers, trained specialists with access to restricted documents. Holders, or anyone else with enough money or power, would essentially hire someone with access to these books in order to come up with the scripture to support whatever it is that they want to do.

So for the most part, yes there would be a lot of philosophical discussions, theological debate and so on, but when it gets to the Theological council the 'gloves come off' and these debates become law.
« Last Edit: 07 Sep 2014, 19:03 by Jikahr »
Logged
Currently training Verbosity to level V.

Nicoletta Mithra

  • Veteran
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1049

Actually, the idea that in the medieval era only clergy was able to read and write is quite outdated and false. That it was only Catholic priests is outright rediculous so I won't go into that (the Byzantine Empire had a far higher literacy rate than the west european states, even though it almost entirely lacked Roman Catholic priests).

So, as to literacy in general: As early as 789, Carolus Magnus' Admonitio Generalis required that schools be established in every monastery and bishopric, in which "children can learn to read; that psalms, notation, chant, computation, and grammar be taught." Of course that was mainly the children of nobility, but also the  patriciate of the cities, which needed skills in reading, writing and calculation for their business.

Records weren't only kept by the church, nor was it the body that saw after the upkeep of the logistic infrastructure all over Europe and all that. E.g. Bologna was established as university (the oldest still operating one) by the german Emperor in opposition to the Pope.

The Pope was the highest spiritual authority in Europe, but in worldly matters he oftentimes had to bow to the wishes of worldly rulers, be that princes, kings or the HREmperor. Already in Latin clēricus has not only the meaning of priest, clergyman, cleric, by the way, but meant also generally a learned man, or "clerk" and in that meaning that word was already used in the medieval era.

And of course there were republics in mediaeval Europe: they appeared all over Europe in the late mediaeval era and were instrumental in preparing the transition to the Renaissance. The Old Swiss Confederacy's foundation can be marked by either the Rütlischwur (dated to 1307 by Aegidius Tschudi) or the 1315 Pact of Brunnen. In 1115 the Republic of Florence was founded, the Republic possibly most famous for its influence on the transition of the mediaeval to the renaissance era. The Republic of Genoa was established even earlier - in the 11th century. And not to forget the Republic of Venice, which was established - according to tradition - in 697, though admittedly back then it wasn't quite as developed a Republic, but a byzantine province that elected amongst its nobilitas a dux.

Also, while I think it is a flawed view to think that Amarr is modeled on Roman Catholicism to begin with (for various reasons and most of them hinting at why it's a bad idea to think that Amarr is a) modeled on a religion and b) any one religion in particular), I find that you're not paying proper attention to the distinction of doctrine and dogma within catholic theology. Doctrine can be questioned and should be - it is therefore open to revision. Even Luther didn't really question Roman Catholic dogma, only doctrine. That is why he so long wished for and pursued for a reformation of the RC church, not a split from it.

In conclusion, I have to disagree with so many of your premises, that I can't possibly bring myself to agree with your conclusions.
Logged

Lyn Farel

  • Guest

Priests in the middle ages were bureaucrats ?  :eek:

What are you referring to exactly ? The only 'bureaucracies' of the middle ages I know of are a few administrative monarchies / republics, and those were handled by secular powers...

Bureaucracy --> Bureau (or 'desk' in French)


I know I am french. >.>


Clergy = Cleric = Clerk

Now then, I am perfectly aware of what the roots of those words are, and I also know that firstly a Cleric isn't a Clerk, even if they share a common history, and secondly and more importantly, it doesn't take a few clerks here and there to make a bureaucratie. I mean, unless you take a bureaucracy at the first literal sense where a non elected body is charged to make laws and apply them. Well most states do that, so everyone becomes a bureaucracy in that case.


The Catholic church oversaw the construction and maintenance over most of the infrastructure in Europe at this time, and by infrastructure I mean roads. Well okay, the Roman empire built the roads and the Catholic church made sure the roads were maintained. Part of maintenance was keeping the roads free from brigands and thieves.

You mean that the Church was charged to patrol and police the lands of their secular lords for who it was one of their main jobs ? :eek:

It was a purely secular job.

Also, I know of no republics in medieval Europe.

I was going to cite the most famous like all those italian republics... This should prove exhaustive enough

Well of course, it's not modern Republics. It's a republican model dating back to Antiquity, but they were here, and in good numbers.

And those were quite... bureaucratic, yes, in comparison to their despotic neighbors.


I would imagine slavery gets questioned all the time. Humans have been questioning slavery for as long as the institution has existed. I think that Socrates (or another Greek philosopher) called for slavery to be abolished, but the question at the time was 'to be replaced with what'?

It's interesting, since the first Engineer in history, a man named 'Hero' in 50 B.C., invented the first steam turbine. He thought it would be useful for opening temple doors, but speculated on other uses for it. Why didn't the Industrial revolution begin until 1700 years later? Slaves. The slave training houses created an uproar about how such a machine might put an end to slavery...and then what would become of all those unemployed slaves?

Well now i'm curious. I find it a bit stretched but what are your sources for that statement ? It sounds a bit... bold...

Which is what is happening in Amarr it seems. Slavery as an institution is dwindling, since machines are cheaper, safer (won't revolt), more dependable, etc. The only reason to maintain slavery is because it is mentioned in the scriptures, and of course because of the Holders (plantation owners) would lose a lot of money. Otherwise, everything the slaves do could be done by machines. Personally, I imagine that the Gallente use Androids the same way Amarrians use slaves. 

I don't disagree with the basic Prime Fiction statement that the Amarr society still has a lot of traditional fields like agriculture tended by slaves, but machines aren't exactly new in the Empire, and they even have a thousands time more advanced society than our current own IRL. They probably already knew how to harvest their crop with a single automated machine before even taking to the stars and the stargates above their world. And since a machine is cheaper to maintain, thousand times more efficient, it's only logical to go for the machine to gain an edge over your competitors.

It's even the precise reason of the opposition between the Caldari society and the Amarr society in the Prime Fiction itself ! The Caldari, being the pragmatics that they are, can't wrap their heads around the concept of slavery. It is stated to be completely alien to them, and the most frequent argument full of confusion you will hear from them is "but it's inefficient ! it makes no sense !".

The hint to a more logical answer lies probably in the concept of tradition.

Quote

There is doctrine, and the doctrine is not to be questioned. Otherwise, how can you explain the existence of the Amarrian Apocrypha?

There is a difference between musing around slavery and how it exists in the Amarrian society and worshipping the Apocrypha.

Quote

Perhaps, but who except the TC and the scholars that have access to the scriptures would be qualified to discuss them authoritatively?

After all, the scriptures are not just one book, but several hundred or thousands of books compiled into a library. Amarrian priests would essentially be lawyers, trained specialists with access to restricted documents. Holders, or anyone else with enough money or power, would essentially hire someone with access to these books in order to come up with the scripture to support whatever it is that they want to do.

So for the most part, yes there would be a lot of philosophical discussions, theological debate and so on, but when it gets to the Theological council the 'gloves come off' and these debates become law.

My point was just that there can be discussion about things, when you stated above that some things "can't be discussed". Not that those discussion always involve final authority in the matter.
Logged

Jace

  • Veteran
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1215

As Mithra reliably pointed out, there is massive historical misunderstanding or ignorance occurring in this thread. If people would like book suggestions to combat this, let me know.
Logged

Jikahr

  • Egger
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 177
  • Grumpy Cat Amarr

Well I feel a little embarrassed at my ignorance and lack of knowledge about European history being exposed.  :oops:

I'm not going to answer every point, since I am clearly wrong about a lot of things. I will try to answer a few questions or make some clarifications.

I would imagine slavery gets questioned all the time. Humans have been questioning slavery for as long as the institution has existed. I think that Socrates (or another Greek philosopher) called for slavery to be abolished, but the question at the time was 'to be replaced with what'?

It's interesting, since the first Engineer in history, a man named 'Hero' in 50 B.C., invented the first steam turbine. He thought it would be useful for opening temple doors, but speculated on other uses for it. Why didn't the Industrial revolution begin until 1700 years later? Slaves. The slave training houses created an uproar about how such a machine might put an end to slavery...and then what would become of all those unemployed slaves?

Well now i'm curious. I find it a bit stretched but what are your sources for that statement ? It sounds a bit... bold...

Well, the invention of the steam turbine in Ancient Greece is historical fact.

http://kotaku.com/5742457/the-ancient-greek-hero-who-invented-the-steam-engine-cybernetics-and-vending-machines

As far as automation vs. slaves, doesn't it make logical sense that a machine would be preferable and more cost efficient to a slave if they were capable of the same work?

Have you heard of the story/ myth of the American slave Henry Clay vs. the steam engine?

Isn't it also plausible that one of the Greek philosophers (Socrates I believe) would have sympathized with the plight of the slaves, and made the argument for the abolition of slavery? I can find the quote somewhere in Plato's Dialogues perhaps, but considering how outspoken he was it doesn't seem that far fetched.

Quote
I don't disagree with the basic Prime Fiction statement that the Amarr society still has a lot of traditional fields like agriculture tended by slaves, but machines aren't exactly new in the Empire, and they even have a thousands time more advanced society than our current own IRL. They probably already knew how to harvest their crop with a single automated machine before even taking to the stars and the stargates above their world. And since a machine is cheaper to maintain, thousand times more efficient, it's only logical to go for the machine to gain an edge over your competitors.

It's even the precise reason of the opposition between the Caldari society and the Amarr society in the Prime Fiction itself ! The Caldari, being the pragmatics that they are, can't wrap their heads around the concept of slavery. It is stated to be completely alien to them, and the most frequent argument full of confusion you will hear from them is "but it's inefficient ! it makes no sense !".

The hint to a more logical answer lies probably in the concept of tradition.


Well, my point is that the wealthy Holders and perhaps the wealthy commoners could afford slaves, and would obviously prefer them for tradition and status. However, if you couldn't afford a slave, which would include their upkeep, training, discipline, etc. then you might turn to a machine replacement.

I understand that Amarr is exponentially more technologically advanced than our own society. Travelling through jump gates to other solar systems is hardly routine or even possible in our world. No one in history has been to another planet, although a few of us have walked on the moon.

That is what makes slavery seem like such an oddity to me. Why is it necessary or desirable? It works well as a story line, but my point is technology > slavery.

The Caldari are right. Slavery is inefficient. The Ancient Romans were learning that too. An owned slave has to be fed, cared for, clothed, housed, etc. even when they aren't working.

On the other hand, a wage earning free man can be called to do the same work as a slave in exchange for just enough to house, clothe and feed themselves...and then they go home when they are no longer needed and are of no further concern or expense to you.

This is what happened in the United States as well with the Emancipation proclamation. Freed slaves had nowhere to go and knew of no other life, so many returned to their former Masters to do the same job they once did as slaves. The difference was that they now received a pittance of a wage in exchange for their labor, so they could buy their own food and shelter instead of the Master providing the food and shelter for them. Instead of the whip, an empty belly through lower wages was now the punishment for not working hard enough.

I can understand slave owning for the status. A pick up truck is more practical and logical to own than a Ferrari, but of course those who can afford a Ferrari might get one just for the thrills and the status.

I just imagine that it would be slave replacing, labor saving technology specifically that would be familiar at least conceptually to the Amarrians, but likely not produced by them. Just as in Aldous Huxley's Brave New World, hundreds of thousands of patents for labor saving devices are filed and never used, because they already breed the Epsilon class for heavy labor.

After all, a labor saving machine might be considered a destructive innovation which would mean less profit for the slave traders.

I suppose the comparison might be between the internal combustion engine which I personally consider undesirable and obsolete, and the electric cars or other means of transport which would replace it. These petroleum merchants are poisoning the planet with continent crossing pipelines which are disrupting the Indigenous people and destroying the natural environment. There are practical alternative solutions which have existed for decades, but the people selling us our petrol don't want to lose any profits even if it means destroying the planet, and they have been bribing our Governments and Police forces in the process.

The technological means to end slavery DO exist. They have probably existed in Amarrian society for thousands of years. However, the wealthiest people in a society don't like it when anything threatens their position, and so they would take steps in order to remove the threat.

In a rigid hierarchical structure such as the Amarr empire, why wouldn't the Slave sellers/ owners approach the Theological council and ensure that any of the perceived future threats to their profits and/or way of life be suppressed or removed?

For example, J.P. Morgan and Thomas Edison suppressing the work of Nikola Tesla because they thought some of his inventions might be a threat to the stability of their financial empire.

Buckminster Fuller said in the 1960s that we have to dismiss the idea that everyone should have to work all the time. Technology is gradually replacing labor, which is why we have 'Inspectors of inspectors of inspectors'. Fuller suggests that we should create a system where everyone is paid to go to school, pursue art or music and so on.

In other words, 'work' as it is commonly defined, which is unpleasant drudgery in exchange for sustenance and shelter, is largely obsolete and unnecessary today. That is likely more true today than it was a half a century ago.

The problem is, (my opinion) and it is now a global problem in this 'age of Austerity', is that we are still using an obsolete 2,000 year old model of the Roman Empire as a framework for our own, and the Roman Empire was based on military conquest and the institution of slavery.

The wealthiest industrialists, investors, bankers and so on of today are beginning to see that technology is quickly rendering human labour obsolete. However, what do we do with all of the unemployed? They still see poverty as a means for incentive. The carrot of the luxury item and the stick of homelessness.

For the first time in human history however, scarcity and poverty are conditions that are deliberately created, not the result of a natural disaster. There could be a more equitable society, where everyone could pursue their interests and all the work would be done by machines. However, the most wealthy and powerful men on the planet are trying to hold that world back.

I apologize for the rant.

What I'm trying to illustrate here is why someone that has a business in the slave trade might want to keep an Android (or whatever) out of the Empire. There are, after all, a lot of unusual things that are contraband in the Amarr empire, such as Rock music, for seemingly no other reason than the Theological council forbids it.

Slavery is clearly mentioned in the scriptures as a necessary path to spiritual enlightenment, so wouldn't you be depriving a slave their entrance into Heaven by replacing them with a soulless Android instead?

Scripture is the word of God after all, so it's pretty difficult to argue with a believer against it. This is especially true if you live in a Theocratic state.

Yes I understand that the Amarr have been in contact with the Caldari and the Gallente for hundreds of years. Anything that the Caldari or Gallente would use or manufacture would be easily available to most Amarrians. Also, at least half of Amarr (according to PF) are not even particularly religious but just go through the motions so as not to cause waves. So there would be no religious incentive to be a 'mentor' to a slave.

I just thought this clash of the 'old' and 'new' was meant to cause dynamic tension in the Prime Fiction. An Amarrian commoner who would prefer to by an Android, but who has to buy at least a doorman in order to keep up appearances. Perhaps it doesn't really matter if it is backstory.

Yes of course Empress Jamyl Sarum rocked the Empire not only with being a clone, but with her edict of manumission of a massive amount of slaves. That would certainly cause a huge disruption in the balance of power and infuriate the Holders who likely owned these slaves.

« Last Edit: 08 Sep 2014, 22:45 by Jikahr »
Logged
Currently training Verbosity to level V.

Jikahr

  • Egger
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 177
  • Grumpy Cat Amarr

As Mithra reliably pointed out, there is massive historical misunderstanding or ignorance occurring in this thread. If people would like book suggestions to combat this, let me know.

Yes, I would like some book suggestions thanks!
Logged
Currently training Verbosity to level V.

Arista Shahni

  • Pod Captain
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 534

Important note.

COMMONERS CAN NOT HOLD SLAVES. 

No matter how rich they are. 

Being a Holder is more than being rich/noble = its almost *moar blessed* (trditionally).  This is why they have the power to control land and people.

Not every Amarrian gets their first slave on their Sweet 16.

Also. WAY MORE COMMONERS THAN NOBLES.  They ARE hired by nobles - to drive those hovercars and techy things that one may or may not allow a slave to do depending on holder.  Orwhatever.

Amarr is not Nobles and Slaves

Its Nobles, commoners, slaves, priests, yadda, yadda.

Ok, proceed.



« Last Edit: 08 Sep 2014, 22:37 by Arista Shahni »
Logged

Jikahr

  • Egger
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 177
  • Grumpy Cat Amarr

Important note.

COMMONERS CAN NOT HOLD SLAVES. 

No matter how rich they are. 

Being a Holder is more than being rich/noble = its almost *moar blessed* (trditionally).  This is why they have the power to control land and people.

Not every Amarrian gets their first slave on their Sweet 16.

Also. WAY MORE COMMONERS THAN NOBLES.  They ARE hired by nobles - to drive those hovercars and techy things that one may or may not allow a slave to do depending on holder.  Orwhatever.

Amarr is not Nobles and Slaves

Its Nobles, commoners, slaves, priests, yadda, yadda.

Ok, proceed.

I wish I would have known that at character creation. Oh well, what the heck do I need slaves for anyways?

I read that the Holders owned slaves, not that the commoners were forbidden to own them.
Logged
Currently training Verbosity to level V.
Pages: [1] 2