House of the Rising Sun?

[Xilaw]

I found an interesting image:

Xilaw

I find only one thing inexact. There should be a cloud somewhere over the king with gilded characters saying "God".

TwistedSun

Meh, that's the heavenly kingdom. Doesn't give or take anything so it was left out of the diagram, though I like this very much. It gives me more of an insight on the situation. I never really studied about the structure of the medieval society in dept so I'm a little bit ignorant when it comes to that. As for other stuff, I'm more or less moderate. I do my research :)

Xilaw

Was just doing some irony, don't worry :P The fact is that before the 17th century none questions on the nature of royal power. It was given for granted that it came directly from God.

TwistedSun

I don't think anything was questioned back then. Everyone just accepted it as it was, either because they were illiterate and uneducated or because they feared the almighty church that was out to get anyone who was going against it's teachings. Dark ages, indeed.

[TwistedSun]

I don't think anything was questioned back then. Everyone just accepted it as it was, either because they were illiterate and uneducated or because they feared the almighty church that was out to get anyone who was going against it's teachings. Dark ages, indeed.

Xilaw

Let's simply say they had more... 'pressing' troubles to overcome. And by that I mean: The end of the world, famine, wars, epidemies, poverty, slavery etc. etc. They had really little time to question themselves from where the sovereignty came from ^^' Edit* Also, I somehow stumbled across this wiki. It would surely be of great interest to you. Austrian nobility.

[Xilaw]

I don't think anything was questioned back then. Everyone just accepted it as it was, either because they were illiterate and uneducated or because they feared the almighty church that was out to get anyone who was going against it's teachings. Dark ages, indeed.

Xilaw

Let's simply say they had more... 'pressing' troubles to overcome. And by that I mean: The end of the world, famine, wars, epidemies, poverty, slavery etc. etc. They had really little time to question themselves from where the sovereignty came from ^^'

TwistedSun

Yes, but we had those things even in the Enlightment era. Heck, we even have these things in the modern era. The only two world wars happened in the last century, we've had several deathly epidemics just in the past two decades, last of which is ebola. Poverty and famine is still a major problem in a lot of countries. The only improvement is slavery and even that is not entirely eradicated. There have been cases of slavery in Europe in the 21st century and other western countries. I think it has more to do with education than anything else. Majority of the population was illiterate and couldn't expand their knowledge. On top of that, church was extremely powerful which slowed down the pace of innovation and evolution of thought and science. Any research that gave birth to ideas that were against the religious dogma were frowned upon and people would be prosecuted because of it. We have monarchies even today, despite a huge step forward in evolution of critical thought, like democracy. I find it ironic that some of the most democratic and prosperous countries in the world are in fact monarchies- Sweden, UK and Belgium for example :D

[LordZell]

So wait will we do an actual family app or just a family name or something and work it down from that.

[Xilaw]

So wait will we do an actual family app or just a family name or something and work it down from that.

LordZell

You make it up. You don't actually play your RL family. Make up a German sounding name and work your way down. I will post my family tree so everyone can see what it should look like.

[Xilaw]

I can't believe I did this. This took longer than I was hoping. If you can't see it very well, right-click it and open in another tab. It should enlarge it quite a bit.

[gowia]

Jesus someone has worked their little socks off...I sit down to you sir.

[Xilaw]

Jesus someone has worked their little socks off...I sit down to you sir.

gowia

German clusterfuck gave me brain splinters. I am still not sure if I got all of them right. I used wiki, my pixelated map and google maps and it's difficult to pinpoint where exactly something is. The capitals are somewhat in the right place, they weren't randomly put either. I'm already working on another map, this one is based on our realm and the close surroundings.

[gowia]

Literally it is all fantastic. I can see this will be a very very good RP and cannot wait for an OOC and then an IC.

[Xilaw]

Literally it is all fantastic. I can see this will be a very very good RP and cannot wait for an OOC and then an IC.

gowia

If only I put as much effort in my studies as I do in drawing maps of fictional lands :D By the way, I chose the shittiest piece of land to place our realm so now I pretty much have to make up names of towns, castles, etc. That corner of Austria has no important cities, never had, and the villages and towns that are there have the worst names.

[gowia]

I know that feeling :P Place names are the best bit. Creating your own lore i found much nicer than posting existing info.

[Xilaw]

I know that feeling :P Place names are the best bit. Creating your own lore i found much nicer than posting existing info.

gowia

Yea, but the trick with German towns is that they have prefixes and suffixes that somewhat describe them. Burg means borough while Berg means mountain. Dorf is village etc. So I have to look at google maps and then back at my map to see where I put down the settlement. It's a drag :|

[gowia]

Ahhh yeah that sounds like it would be a bit of a bore. I have to say it is impressive how much effort you are putting into this.

[Xilaw]

Ahhh yeah that sounds like it would be a bit of a bore. I have to say it is impressive how much effort you are putting into this.

gowia

To be honest, I wish I wasn't. But I keep wanting to do more and it's more or less a waste of precious time, especially in the middle of exams heh. I'm almost done with the maps and all, and then I will start writing the events. After I write down a few I will then work out all the mechanics, rules, etc. and open up the thread in the Roleplay section. Should be within this week.

[gowia]

This does seem like it is taking up all your time. If you need any help drop me a PM and also I cannot wait till the thread is up.

[TwistedSun]

I volunteer as well, my king! May the path of the Gryphon lead us to victory! *whispers* and obscenely enormous amounts of gold... *whispers*

[rush99999]

Me too

[Xilaw]

Thanks for the support guys. Anyway, I can't think of anything I need help with at the moment. Here's the progress: I am not done yet, there are still a few things to be added but yeah. I also said to myself fuck it and didn't go full detail with this map. Towns and castles are kind of historical but not in the right places. Some names are made up or just modified. Also, I've included a few places that bear the same name as the royal families of some of you guys. This doesn't necessarily mean that place will be awarded to your royal family though.

[Vahir]

Was just doing some irony, don't worry :P The fact is that before the 17th century none questions on the nature of royal power. It was given for granted that it came directly from God.

TwistedSun

I don't think anything was questioned back then. Everyone just accepted it as it was, either because they were illiterate and uneducated or because they feared the almighty church that was out to get anyone who was going against it's teachings. Dark ages, indeed.

Xilaw

No. Kings in the 17th century certainly ruled with a divine right to rule, but that's been pretty much standard for all of history- every despot since the cavemen claimed to rule with the mandate of heaven. And throughout that history, it was never enough to just shut everyone up- whether the people accepted an autocrat was largely dependent on the man's political strength. I mean, the 17th century saw ol' Charlie of England- one of the great proponents of the divine right to rule, mind you- be overthrown and executed, largely because of his attemps to control everything. The second assertion I'd like to contest, and one that makes me cringe in terrible agony every time I see it, is everything you said about the so called 'dark ages'. Apparently, everything between the fall of Rome in the 400s and the renaissance was anarchy and cultural stagnation, which lasted over a thousand years. Except for, what do you call it, the Carolingian renaissance of the 700s, or the cultural brilliance of the Byzantines and the Islamic world, ect, ect. /Sarcasm My point here is that calling the 400-1400 period the 'dark ages' is a gross oversimplification, one which reduces the greatness of the countless civilizations that rose and fell in that period (yes, civilization did exist). Finally, you seem to imply that the 'church'- by which I assume you refer to the Roman Catholic Church- was not only a proponent of the divine authority of Kings, but actively hunted those who opposed their tyranny. This is a ridiculous concept; for one thing, the popes would never impart divine authority on kings, authority they guarded as their own. The thousand years you clumped into the 'dark ages' saw a constant struggle between the papacy and the European Kings for religious authority. And even if one were to ignore that and pretend that the popes loved these Kings, it ignores the simple fact that your statement is an anachronism. By the 17th century, the roman church was already spiraling into its political decline. A third of Europe had broken off and formed their owned reformed churches, and even in those catholic nations that remained, papal authority was almost non-existent. With that said, good sir, I bid you adieu. (Oh, and I'm interested in the RP.)

[rush99999]

Was just doing some irony, don't worry :P The fact is that before the 17th century none questions on the nature of royal power. It was given for granted that it came directly from God.

TwistedSun

I don't think anything was questioned back then. Everyone just accepted it as it was, either because they were illiterate and uneducated or because they feared the almighty church that was out to get anyone who was going against it's teachings. Dark ages, indeed.

Xilaw

No. Kings in the 17th century certainly ruled with a divine right to rule, but that's been pretty much standard for all of history- every despot since the cavemen claimed to rule with the mandate of heaven. And throughout that history, it was never enough to just shut everyone up- whether the people accepted an autocrat was largely dependent on the man's political strength. I mean, the 17th century saw ol' Charlie of England- one of the great proponents of the divine right to rule, mind you- be overthrown and executed, largely because of his attemps to control everything. The second assertion I'd like to contest, and one that makes me cringe in terrible agony every time I see it, is everything you said about the so called 'dark ages'. Apparently, everything between the fall of Rome in the 400s and the renaissance was anarchy and cultural stagnation, which lasted over a thousand years. Except for, what do you call it, the Carolingian renaissance of the 700s, or the cultural brilliance of the Byzantines and the Islamic world, ect, ect. /Sarcasm My point here is that calling the 400-1400 period the 'dark ages' is a gross oversimplification, one which reduces the greatness of the countless civilizations that rose and fell in that period (yes, civilization did exist). Finally, you seem to imply that the 'church'- by which I assume you refer to the Roman Catholic Church- was not only a proponent of the divine authority of Kings, but actively hunted those who opposed their tyranny. This is a ridiculous concept; for one thing, the popes would never impart divine authority on kings, authority they guarded as their own. The thousand years you clumped into the 'dark ages' saw a constant struggle between the papacy and the European Kings for religious authority. And even if one were to ignore that and pretend that the popes loved these Kings, it ignores the simple fact that your statement is an anachronism. By the 17th century, the roman church was already spiraling into its political decline. A third of Europe had broken off and formed their owned reformed churches, and even in those catholic nations that remained, papal authority was almost non-existent. With that said, good sir, I bid you adieu. (Oh, and I'm interested in the RP.)

Vahir