Quote:
Originally Posted by combatmedic
The Romans did have a state religion, Astromancer. They had one from the time of King Numa all the way to the end of the Empire in 1453 AD; it just wasn't the same state religion the whole time. I suggest that polytheists make a different sort of claim than monotheists. Syncretism is possible with either set of theological assumptions, but it's arguably easier with polythiesm. The same goes for pluralism. Please note that the Romans did, at various times, ban certain cults that made trouble for the Republic/Empire, or that grossly offended the sensibilities of the elite.
|
At no point did I claim the Romans lacked a State Religion. I simply pointed out their notorious cynicism about it.
Quote:
|
Oh, and it's no fair to make bold claims, like 'the US has never been an empire' and then forbid anyone to challenge said claims. Either make statements you can defend, or don't make them. :)
|
We have different standards of evidence on the issue. So if common terms aren't possible, I don't want to argue.
But we can comunicate on many other things.
Quote:
|
I'm going to ask again- can we please move the non-Traveller stuff to PMs? I'm perfectly happy to discuss imperialism, secularism, federalism, militarism, and Astromancerism in a more appropriate venue. I'm offering you that venue; let's talk about this stuff in PMs.
|
I only brought up Terran History as a part of the issue of Imperial Culture. Every culture defines the Past in its own terms. Which events are important and which ones are ignored define the society and the limits of the possible.
This really isn't different that the idea that I floated in the
GURPS:TRAVELLER Nobles playtest that popular culture in the 3I would routinely make minor nobles into protagonists and heros. The person who can deal with the problem, be it injustice or vampires, would be a noble or of Noble Blood.
The narrative of the possible is part of the foundation of any society. It's even more vital to an Empire.