One kingdom protecting another sovereign kingdom - does this make sense?

Cedric

First Post
When I first read this I was tempted to lapse into the realm of politics...but the mods will be happy that I just leashed that thought. On the topic though, d4 was right, there are numerous historical examples of this.

More often then not one country aids another just because they share a border and country X knows that as long as they help defend country Y, they are sharing a border with friends.

Cedric
 

log in or register to remove this ad

kenjib

First Post
Cedric said:
When I first read this I was tempted to lapse into the realm of politics...but the mods will be happy that I just leashed that thought. On the topic though, d4 was right, there are numerous historical examples of this.

I'm interested. :) You can email me if you want...
 
Last edited:

Darklone

Registered User
kenjib said:
I actually thought of the similarity to LotR after I posted. I forgot about the similarity to Kalamar though. Do you guys think it is similar in a bad way?

I really like all of those ideas Darklone. That's great stuff!
I don't think at all it's bad, I love it. Actually you changed the whole arrangement more into something that fits my personal taste of these situations, not as explosive as Kalamar already is, if you know what I mean.

You could check out some historical sources about how a knight earned his spurs and change some of these things... Native Americans: how they earned their names. Stuff like that.

Customs like: Every second daughter of the northern nobles should get married to a horseman who has to steal her... (which is nowadays arranged)... some old bards tales about a hero who stole his lady after she stole his heart...
 

Cedric

First Post
I'm interested. You can email me if you want...

I'll keep it limited to thoughts and ideas that we could apply to our own settings. But basically, the reason one country supports another often has more to do with who the enemy is than who the country your supporting is.

Supporting a friendly neighboring country is, in the political realm, almost a no brainer. If you aren't supporting them, it's because you are planning to take them over yourself (which you could more easily do by supporting them, like I said, no brainer).

By supporting the friendly neighbor, you keep the friendship alive. Good trade, good relations, etc. But much, much more importantly, you get to fight a war in his backyard, not your own. All the collateral damage is being done to his country, not yours. In the end, you help his country out, in exchange for very favorable trading rights.

Also, you are protecting your future, because the enemy he is fighting today, could very well be the enemy you are going to fight tomorrow if he isn't stopped today.

But often a country will find reasons to support another country even when they aren't neighbors and aren't close to each other, and why? Because you are supporting them against your enemy.

You don't even have to like their country to help them against your enemy. In fact, historically, this is often the case. You are most likely helping the other country because by doing so, you force your enemy to expend more resources and more troops. Bad for their economy, their morale and their bloodlust.

I can email you specific historical examples of this...both recent and old if you want. But if you think about it, I'm sure you'll come up with a lot of them (many recent and high profile).

Cedric
 

S'mon

Legend
kenjib said:
Does this arrangement sound like it makes sense or is it too contrived?

Sounds like US/Canada relationship to me - US would protect Canada if it's attacked by a foreign power, Canada is still a sovereign state. Canada might help USA but isn't obliged to.
 


Tonguez

A suffusion of yellow
"There was a blue wolf, which was born
Having (his) destiny from heaven above.
His spouse was a fallow doe.
They came, passing over the Sea.
Batacaciqan was born when they camped
At the head of the Onon River,
At (Mount) Burkan Qaldun"


The Secret History of the Mongols recounts the existence of the legendary and sacred ancestors of the Mongols: the Blue Wolf and the White Fallow Doe. They had a son who was the ancestor (twenty-three generations) of Genghis Khan.

The Blue Wolf came from the 'Northern Forests' (probably Siberia) and the Fallow deer from the West.

You could apply a similar mythology to Bressia and the Northlands and the Prophecy could relate to none other than Temujin himself!.
Indeed the Danish traveler, Henning Haslund-Christensen once said that “The Mongols do not count any spot of Earth his own because everything is the property of Heaven.” as such it could be that the Bressians idea of the 'ideal lifestyle' is the one that the Northlanders actually live, heaven is a grassland where the faithful will sit beside Nomos on an endless ride!

There is Mongolian saying, “When you’re horse is alive, go and see places, thus, when you’re father is alive, go and get acquainted with others.”
 
Last edited:

MaxKaladin

First Post
Tonguez said:
Indeed the Danish traveler, Henning Haslund-Christensen once said that “The Mongols do not count any spot of Earth his own because everything is the property of Heaven.” as such it could be that the Bressians idea of the 'ideal lifestyle' is the one that the Northlanders actually live, heaven is a grassland where the faithful will sit beside Nomos on an endless ride!

Probably an idealized version of it. It kinda reminds me of the way some cultures have had this idealized version of rural farm life they held up to be the ideal lifestyle. Of course, it didn't really have all that much in common with the reality of things. Even if you have people sending their sons north to live with the nomads for a while, they may still have an idealized version of such a life. They may experience the relatively luxurious lifestyle of the nomad nobility, but miss out on the harsher life of the common nomad in a manner not unlike the way Marie Antoniette used to play at being a shepherdess or milkmaid.
 

Darth Shoju

First Post
I actually thought of the similarity to LotR after I posted. I forgot about the similarity to Kalamar though. Do you guys think it is similar in a bad way?

Naw I don't think it's really bad. I mean this is such a general concept (and one based in real-world history) that one can hardly fault you for adopting it. Really, you are just mining history as Tolkien and Kenzer have allready done. Nothing wrong with that at all. Frankly I think what you've got going here is really well thought out and should provide a wealth of potential plot points. Well done!
 
Last edited:

Remove ads

Top