The same that goes for Quentin also goes for you, of course. Please respect the editing moratorium (on top of Lla Dafern and the Main Page). It won't last long. Within a few days, we will know more about the future of this wiki and Ill Bethisad as a whole. In the meantime, if would be appreciated if you refrain from editing wiki pages (except for Lla Dafern and your own user page, of course). Regards, —IJzeren Jan Uszkiełtu? 01:50, 29 June 2006 (PDT)
One comment. Please make sure that you're only adjusting countries that you are really going to maintain. I would suggest that you really concentrate your efforts on Iraaq, if that's your chosen "sandbox" before you branch out to anything else. BoArthur 11:36, 5 July 2006 (PDT)
reply to BoArthur
OK. I will concentrate more on Iraaq than into other places. In fact there are more stuff which can be created about Iraaq, although at this moment I don't have anything planned about that country.
Right now I have a proposal ready to edit about the Arab Community which you can see a draft on Conculture posted at the first days when all the discussion started at Lla Dafern. Perhaps it became completely hidden from everyone as all that discussion took the general attention. Wonder if I should edit it as a proposal at proposals pages or if I should edit it right on my user page. What do you think? --Pedromoderno 12:22, 5 July 2006 (PDT)
like what you did. If you have any suggestion for australasia (the system wouldn't be unified) or New Francy, feel free to make a proposal.--Marc Pasquin 23:51, 26 July 2007 (PDT)
- For now I don't have anything in mind related to other postal histories but perhaps in future something will come out. Thanks for your interest.--Pedromoderno 18:21, 30 July 2007 (PDT)
Would you care if we finally decided who will win the 2012 World's Fair now? Misterxeight 14:06, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
No problem. Wonder which one you will chose.--Pedromoderno 14:09, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
Well Johannesburg looks interesting; but Britan and the NAL-SLC have held it so many times; the world might be bored of an Anglosphere nation holding the Fair. My next choice would be Nagano, but Japan has already held it. The only other choice I can remember is somewhere within Tibet. So I guess you could say I have in fact chosen Lhasa, Tibet. Misterxeight 14:35, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
For me that's OK. You are right about so many World's Fairs held in Anglosphere (or perhaps FK-Sphere).--Pedromoderno 23:17, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
I think FK-Sphere makes more sense :)
Though Tibet may have to tone it down a bit. Afterall they supress the Muslims living in the area (yet oddly enough not the Christians) and they're somewhat militaristic, right? We might have to go with Egypt if that's the case. It seems everywhere I pick there is always so problem. Misterxeight 23:42, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
- I expect that Tibet do suppress the Christians, at least somewhat. They may have Assyrian metropolitanates within their territory, but my impression is that the functioning of these is akin to the Russian Orthodox Church under the Communists *here*, or *here*'s Patriarchate of Constantinople under the Ottomans. Probably not quite as bad off as the Christian church in Sudan, but it could be. They're there, and they've been there for a goodly while, but the government doesn't like it a bit. But maintaining a public image of religious toleration is usually good international politics. Geoff 13:37, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
I think we need to disregard Tibet. Even if for the next four years they decide to lift the religious persecutions, some of the Hui Muslims will tell the world of how hard it was under Buddhist Tibetan rule. I guess the only other choice is Egypt by default. Misterxeight 14:23, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
Do you have any ideas for a Greek Naval Ensign? Misterxeight 17:27, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
Olá, senhor, tudo bem? I was wondering if I might be able to ask you two questions about Syria and Lebanon.
I was reading Syria's page today, and I noticed that Syria has the same amount of Christians as our world's pre-Civil War Syria, despite being under Christian rule for a few decades. I was thinking that perhaps with favouritism towards Christians and crackdowns on Muslim Syrians might have raised the percentage of Christians in the country slightly. That is, unless, Syria did have more Christians, only they fled after SNORist rule ended? Have you thought about a Syrian Arab diaspora? I think it'd be great if more Christians went with Mishil Aflaq to exile in Greece and swelled the ranks of the Arab community in Athens or Constantinople. I mean hey, even "here" (Palestinian) Arabs are well-renowned for their construction work in Athens and Istanbul's Eastern Orthodox population is mostly made up of Antiochian Arabs who fled Syria and Lebanon.
My second question is, as guardian of Syria and Lebanon, where do you think the headquarters of the Patriarchate of Antioch would've fled to? In our world, the Patriarchate was moved to Damascus in 1517 in order to flee from Ottoman conquest and it never moved back. Nowadays, I was surprised to find that there really are no Christians left to speak of in Antioch. Did the same thing happen in Ill Bethisad? I'm also a bit fuzzy on details in regards to Antiochian Christianity. It seems that the Melkite Schism of the 18th Century never happened, but instead the Patriarchate was forced into union with Rome during Crusader rule. What is the status of the Patriarchate of Antioch nowadays "there?" Are there three of them like in our world?
Obrigado, senhor! Misterxeight 10:46, 7 April 2014 (PDT)
- Γεια σας. Firstly, in my idea Syria had Christian rulers until the 17th century and briefly once again between 1949 and 1955. As it is said on history chapter many Christians fled to Lebanon when their rule was deposed on 17th century, but those who stayed were still a reasonabily large number of people. They were enough to later plot against Hashemite rule bringing the republican system in 1932 so as to take full power in 1949. I didn't think about a mass exile of Christians after arab snorists lost power but I like the idea. I will add it to Syria article. So guess Christians were more than 10% of population before 1955.
About your second question, I didn't think deeply about these religious matters honestly and I honestly don't know much about Middle Eastern Christianity. I'm sure there are still lots of Christians in Antioch *there*, let you remind IB Antioch gave to the world Pope Gregory XVIJ. Perhaps due a much longer Crusader presence Antioch reamined headquarter of Patriarchate.
And third, I don't consider myself as caretaker of Syria and Lebanon. It seems Steg is the one, at least always seemed to me to be the caretaker of the Middle East. Much of my ideas were developed from what others wrote here before. Sometimes a single sentence is enough to imagine a whole new development of this wonderful world. In my opinion everyone is free to develop ideas to fill the gaps. Especially if is someone with good ideas and knowledge.--Pedromoderno 18:08, 7 April 2014 (PDT)
Hm, so then I suppose that the Arab Diaspora worldwide is going to be markedly more Christian than "here." I wish there was a way to actually figure out these statistics. Is there are larger Jewish population in the region, too, or would any Arab Jews just be Judaean in Ill Bethisad, I wonder?
I didn't know that about the Papacy. I better send Mr. Belsky an email, then, for some clarification. I hope that the entirety of Antioch is not Catholic; that puts we caretakers of Orthodoxy out of a job! I'm a bit wary myself of writing things without explicit permission; my track record in the past is not the best, you see. If you ever desire to write about the Arab Diaspora in Greece, please by all means go ahead!
Adeus, senhor! Até logo! Misterxeight 12:21, 9 April 2014 (PDT)
- I don't know how Christian is Arab Diaspora, at least regarding post-1955 Syria it seems to make sense to me. But on the other way other situations made Arabs from other countries to leave their countries, for example from Iraaq due to the succession of wars and poverty.
About Jews, I don't know if *there* they closed to themselves (like much in *here's* world) or if they didn't. I believe if they closed to themselves they might be rather ethnic homogeneous and possibly Jew, Hebrew and Judean will be almost synonimous, but if they didn't situation will be rather different. Imagine if Jews tried to spread their faith like Christians and others did. Imagine how large could be the Jewish Inuit community in Alyaska.:) Anyway in the Middle East there are at least two larger Jewish communities: Judea and Himyar (*here's* North Yemen more or less). Judeans speak a romance language, Himyarite guess they speak their own south arabian language. It was also referred about Jewish communities in other parts of the Middle East, like in Iraaq where they speak aramaic. I don't know if all them are descendents of ancient Hebrews or if they were people from other ethnicities who embrassed Jewish faith. Anyway I like the idea of a mixed solution about this.--Pedromoderno 07:30, 10 April 2014 (PDT)
The Ottoman Empire
Good to see you active again! I had asked the group if I could take charge of the Byzantine & Ottoman Empires of IB to work out Greek history, but Mr. Hicken informed me that you are the caretaker of the Ottoman Empire. How much do you know about there's Ottoman Empire, and could I propose a few ideas for it? Misterxeight 13:41, 27 September 2015 (PDT)
- I didn't know I was the caretaker of something, honestly! It's true more than anyone else I developed Middle East history during last years but I never considered myself caretaker of anything. As far I know the caretaker of the Middle East isSteg. Anyway I think you can work about the Ottoman and Byzantines empires, would be great to have more people working about the region.--Pedromoderno 01:55, 28 September 2015 (PDT)
Ah, you know I just read our last correspondence after I sent the above message and you told me the exact same thing last time. Sorry!
Also, I reread Mr. Hicken's message to me, and I don't think he urged me to ask for your permission to write so much as just give you a head's up for I was planning. If you have the time, I'd love to start a proper conversation about one of Ill Bethisad's biggest blindspots.
As it stands, Greek history is a mess. Many, many, many past events were left completely unexplained. My most vexing is that Greece was the last part of the Balkans to get its independence in 1863, but had a colony in 1911. Dan suggested that a stronger, greater Greek diaspora could bring back a lot of remissions from abroad and that's a good idea, but I do not believe that it is enough. The Ottoman occupation needs to be a lot less caustic for this to be pulled off. For this, I was thinking that the Byzantine Empire falls later (it may or may not be canon that Constantinople falls in 1453, although Byzantine successor states in our world lived on for a few more years, so I can do the same but longer in this world). On top of that, the janissary corps can never be formed. It was too taxing on the Balkan populace. A friend proposed that the Ghazis of the Ottomans be reformed into a rigid military-class, and only Ghazis. On top of that, the millet system looks nice on paper, but in practice it is not. I proposed a centralized tax system and bureaucracy because the Ottoman state at times was incredibly inefficient, unfair, and because the Patriarchate was put in charge of taxation, it damaged the reputation of the Orthodox Church. Finally, one thing that needs to happen is that the Ottoman Empire can not be so cut off from technological and other developments in Western Europe. To this end, I think that Xliponia will come in handy, because it was never conquered by the Ottomans and it could be a gateway to the Balkans and Middle East from the West (especially what with the center of learning in Greece during the renaissance, Ioannina, being so close to the border). This way, we can get Ottoman reforms and Western technology faster in our part of the world. I imagine that a more efficient Ottoman Empire might benefit your projects as well, but I eagerly look forward to any questions, criticisms, and other ideas that you have.
Obrigado muito, Misterxeight 09:59, 28 September 2015 (PDT)
Cataloguing Event Dates
Pedro, a heartfelt merci for your help in cataloguing the dates of things. I appreciate it! BoArthur 10:12, 17 November 2015 (PST)
- You welcome. I will catalogue more dates later.--Pedromoderno 07:18, 19 November 2015 (PST)
Adding to Syria’s History
Hey, this idea just popped into my head. Remember last year when we hashed out the religious demographics for Syria and we wrote in that a lot of the SNOR’ists fled to Greece after their reign ended? Could we make mention that a lot of them (if not moreso) fled to Bulgaria, too? It’d be cool to have a thriving Arab communitg in Bulgaria. P.S. I had another idea for religion in Syria last week, but I completely forgot it. Misterxeight 18:03, 1 December 2017 (PST)
- Honestly I don't think those Syrian SNORists would flee to Bulgaria during thew 1950's. At that time Bulgaria was one of the contituents of the Confederation of Soviet Danubian States (CSDS) so I don't see why a communist state would give shelter to SNORist refugees. If you are thinking in an Arab community in Bulgaria guess you have to look for another historical situation (perhaps the end of Abdul Karim Qassim rule in Iraaq (1979), after an islamic revolution.--Pedromoderno 19:01, 1 December 2017 (PST)
Ha, just minutes after I sent that out, I remembered that Bulgaria was communist for most of the 20th Century and only became SNORist in the '90's after the breakup of alternate Yugoslavia.
Would you be okay with secular, cultural-Muslim Kurds and Arabs fleeing in the 1950's, settling down in Sofia as separate communities, and then another wave of Arabs coming in the 2000's to work in Bulgaria's industrial sector? The dichotomy between atheist or nominally-Sunni and then perhaps more conservative Orthodox Christian (or even Sunnis or Catholics) newcomers sounds like it could be fun.
- P.S. So I was going over some notes of mine, and I realized that due to the historical conditions that existed, a lot of sub-Churches within the wider network of Catholicism might never have come to existed or have died out due to minimal converts. Two of those include the Chaldean Church (in IB, Geoff made the Assyrian Church of the East robust and it survived Timur's all out genocide in the 1400's, so then it would never have needed outside help to revitalize the faith with some churchmen turning to Catholic missionaries) or the Syriac Church (the Syriac Catholic Church only joined in the late 1600's again, due to requesting help from Catholic missionaries. Since the Crusaders get chased out only in the 1500's and Catholicism gets greatly diminished and no longer plays a role in politics in the region). I know we had days of back and forth to really make Syria's religious demographics accurate, but would you mind if I go edit your page and take out the Chaldeans and Syriac Catholic Churches? I could either take their numbers and add it to the Assyrians and the Syriac Orthodox, or I could add their numbers to Latin Catholics and the others so the overall no. of Catholics in Syria stays the same.
Misterxeight 14:38, 4 December 2017 (PST)
Hello my friend,
I've been working on my own sphere of influence for a while, but since we sort of came up with the History of Samraj together, I'd like to give some input on my own personal opinion about how things panned out.
First of all, I don't really think Samraj would be anywhere near the level of poverty seen in *here*'s India. I may be misreading the article you put together, but it seems that with the way you wrote out European protectionism against Samraj that was what you were going for (though maybe to a lesser extent). Now I don't necessarily disagree that protectionism in Europe would have hurt the Samraji economy, but I don't think that it would have hurt it that much. Samraj could have always found other markets in the Americas (excluding possibly the NAL) and in the rest of Asia.
I also think that the reforms of Razarama III would be rather more concerned with political, military and logistical matters than industrial ones. Keep in mind that the Mughal Empire was already undergoing a period of proto-industrialisation before the British came in and wrecked everything, so IMO industrialization in Samraj and the rest of India would follow a timeline more similar to that of Europe (though possibly hampered by European protectionist measures). Meanwhile, Razarama's reforms would have primarily concerned themselves with getting Samraj up to speed with Japan and the constitutional monarchies of Europe in terms of military and political prowess.
Finally, while I don't necessarily find a problem with someone like Hedagevara coming in and pushing Samraj into a repressive conservative dictatorship, I should note that in practice Indian society was integrated more along the lines of "jatis" (hereditary groups which devoted themselves to certain occupations and could occupy one or even various varnas) than along varnas themselves, at least until the arrival of the British (who considered the Kshatriyas and Brahmins "whiter" and therefore superior). Now, it is possible that Hedagevara was a very puritanical Hindu who advocated for the reformation of Indian society along varna lines, mixed with fascist policies. That way we could have Hedagevara's regime while still managing to explain why Samraji society would (attempt to) radically re-organise itself in that manner.
On a side note, I should mention that Indian tea is actually mostly from Nepal and Assam, not any of the territories that would be under Samraji control *there*. So tea production would be focused in those areas (and possibly also China).
That's all I have for now, my friend. Sorry if I came off a little harsh, those are just my personal recommendations and opinions w/r/t Samraji history. I'll be more than happy to work with you to reach a solution we both approve of. Juanmartinvelezlinares 11:16, 4 December 2017 (PST)
That’s what happens when someone tries to make an ambitious article without knowing enough about the subject. Now going by parts:
-Poverty: it always seemed to me historicaly there was always a large gap between the rulers' richness and the common people in India *here*. I don’t see necessarily to be different *there* as many of the problems in both *here* and *there* India might be common. Possibly that gap became rather smaller due to improving of economic conditions over the decades.
-Protectionism: I believe European protectionist actions would hurt Samraji economy. Keep in mind that Europe was a large market with money enough to pay for imports. Others possibly weren’t as large nor rich: I don’t imagine South America then as a large importer of Indian goods as it is a large continent with not much population, same about Africa. As for other Asian countries, those making their own industrialisation efforts (Japan and China surely, possibly others in South East Asia either which could explain why SE Asia survived independent and strong to European colonialists) I believe they would be protectionist also against imports from Samraj in order to protect their own industries. Anyway cirsis in Samraji textile industry might not had been as hard I described but how would ordinary people would feel it in their tables? Crisis always hit harder the poorer and unprotected.
-Razarama III’s reforms: I wasn’t aware about Indian proto-industrialisation *here* when I wrote the article. So I think you are right about his reforms. I’ll make the proper changes. Anyway industry in Samraj possibly passed from proto-industry stage to truly industrial one under Razarama III, as consequence of his reforms (political, militar and logistical, as you told). Modernisation would be surely to protect the empire and put it at par with European colonial nations and emerging Asian powers.
-Hedagevara: guess segregation under varna lines might have started under Razarama III, in order to simplify administration. I imagined Razarama III as someone who deeply admired Europe and the varnas are more similar to social classes in Europe than jatis. Replacing the importance of jati by the varna lines would be somehow comparable to the forced end of samurai era in *here’s* Japan. This could have been the point of start to Hedegevara’s regime who brought segregation into a deeper level, making official ruling elites under a framework of interdependent varnas giving cohesion to society as a whole. Also giving more importance to the varnas could be an effort of uniformisation of the deeply plural Samraji society divided in plenty of jatis. Dictators always dislike plurality, right?
I would like to keep the core of the article the way it is, even if it needs some important changes. Surely does.--Pedromoderno 19:22, 8 December 2017 (PST)
- Hey, thanks for responding. Here's my response:
- W/r/t Indian poverty: *Here*'s India actually ranks on about the same level as France and South Korea when it comes to income inequality, and Indian society actually has less income inequality than the United States or Britain. That being said though, I don't necessarily think you're wrong; even in the United States there's often a prominent gap between the richest members of society and the poorest. I just think that the poorest Samrajis *there* (as well as other inhabitants of the Indian states) would still be much better off than the poorest Indians *here*.
- Protectionism: I think you're right about at least some European countries, but I think that others wouldn't be quite as heavily inclined to enact protectionist measures against Samraj. Plus, I think there is one major market for Indian goods such as textiles that can't be easily ignored: the North American League, which I don't think was as inclined towards protectionism as European countries were. Plus India produced cheaper textiles in addition to luxury goods, which gives Samraj and the other Indian states a pretty good advantage in some sectors. Overall I don't think it would be as vicious as you described, although obviously there would be pains especially among factory workers and such. But I think that the economic situation in India wouldn't be much worse than the one in, say, Japan or Italy during the same time period.
- Razarama reforms: Nothing to say here. Glad we're both on the same page here.
- Organization along varna lines:I don't think it necessarily needs to start under Razarama III. You're right that the varnas were basically similar to European social classes (peasantry, clergy, bourgeoisie, nobility), but at that point in time many European countries had moved away from such strong organization along class lines; by then, most countries had basically abolished absolute monarchy and the last vestiges of serfdom were dying out. I think, alternatively, that Hedagevara may have had connections to Hindu reform movements which more strongly emphasised the Vedas and desired a "back-to-Vedic" Indian society. As a result, Hedagevara decides to emphasize the importance of the varnas in his idea of "Separate Development", which becomes the main far-right idea in Samraj (possibly also combined with Hindutva, or Hindu religious chauvinism). Overall, something like apartheid in *here*'s South Africa, though blissfully nowhere near as long-lived. I agree that Hedagevara would try to stamp out diversity of jatis in Samraj, though.
- Overall, I like what you're getting at. Look forward to your next response.Juanmartinvelezlinares 11:23, 12 December 2017 (PST)