Guns of Infinity

gender-locked-male
multi-part
low-fantasy

#43844

You guys know what would be hilarious?

If after the MC is finally able to marry Katarina, the King suddenly decides that Leoniscourt needs to pay back its massive fortress-building debt from back in Callum’s day.

I doubt it’ll happen, but if it does…


#43845

That would be the MC’s luck and Cataphrak’s naked sadism.


#43846

Over 43495 posts! That’s a heck of alot replied and discussions.


#43847

I’ve spent about 12 days in hours reading and replying to this thread. Life well spent.


#43848

That is one way to put it, to be sure :stuck_out_tongue:


#43849

Also, gotta love how Callum gets named ‘the Cruel’ when he pulled out of his debt to Aetoria, when Edwin more or less did the exact same thing when he altered his deal with Cunaris, but ends up being called ‘the Strong.’

“History written by the victors” at its finest.


#43850

As always, the winning side writes the history books.


#43851

The idea that the winner “always” writes the history books does not survive contact with a good portion of my book collection, and I’m sure we can name other examples than the American Civil War and the Crusades as history written by the losers or by those ambivalent on the matter.

“the Strong” isn’t exactly “the Honorable”.


#43852

Well of course the phrase is not going to apply to every single war in human history. Also, just because books written in the modern age give a fair and unbiased account of something that happened decades or centuries ago, does not mean that a fair and unbiased account was provided in the immediate years after that event happened.

And “the Strong” may not be “the Honorable”, but it also does not imply any lack of honor. Also, strength is still considered a positive quality and is a far better title than “the Cruel”, which is what Callum is called in everywhere that isn’t Leoniscourt.


#43853

@unoriginal_username

It isn’t going to apply to many wars in human history, unless we think that there are no books flattering Napoleon, flattering the Wehrmacht, speaking ill of Genghis Khan, describing the fall of the Roman Empire (in the West especially) as a bad thing, lionizing the Black Prince…

At what point does “the winners write the history books” start being an overgeneralization at best?

I’m not going to say that the winners have no bearing on how history is told, but the winners of (say) the US’s western expansion were in a much better position to prevent the losers from telling their side than say the winners of The War of Spanish Succession, to pick two things.

And sure, “the Strong” beats the “the Cruel” - my objection is to the idea that history is just the prejudices of the winners (as @lokidemon007 seemed to be saying) with a side element of pointing out that if Edwin was seen as a paragon because mythmaking, “the Strong” isn’t especially glowing praise in that context.

Compared to the American Founding Fathers (the fact that phrase is even written with capitals…), it’s almost modest.


#43854

Except most of those books were either never written or never gained popularity until decades or centuries after those events actually happened.

In the aftermath of WW1, people genuinely believed Germany started the war and thought the Treaty of Versailles was deserved. A few people spoke out against it but no one paid attention until decades later.

Anyways, I think Edwin is portrayed as a paragon. The tone of the article (which is supposed to be a historical text) seems to portray Callum is a treacherous, heartless bastard, while Edwin is almost depicted as a brilliant politician whose cunning is to be admired. It goes into full detail on the impact Callum’s dealbreaking had on Aetoria, but barely mentions what effect Edwin’s dealbreaking had on Cunaris other than a transition of power (how many Cunarians died fighting those distraction wars in Kentaur? How much debt did Cunaris acquire over those years? How many aspiring Cunarian officials/commanders lost job opportunities that were bought out by Aetorians? What sort of dealings and betrayals made all this happen?) It dwells on Edwin’s strength, his young age, his cunning, his superiority over his ally Jerome, and at no point does it criticize his decision to seize power.

So yeah, this does seem to be a “history written by the victors” case. It may not be on the same level as some other examples from IRL history, but the propaganda is still there.

Or maybe I’m just reading too deep into this. Who knows?

Edit: Also, more evidence that Caius is actually the Earl’s son: Callum’s nose was massive.


#43855

Winners write the history books works better in a time where not everyone can read or write especially if the losers have no writing system and can be destroyed as a people or reshaped by the victors. Gaius Julius Caesar 's Gallic wars a good example


#43856

Bringing the subject back to the Katarina marriage… if the theory where the Bane is fading from the Cazarostas turns out to be true… what if the MC’s child with Kat turns out Deathborn, and history repeats itself?

I really feel like there’s going to be some massive consequence that makes finally acquiring Leoniscourt completely bittersweet. 25,000 crowns per year year must be too good to be true…


#43857

@unoriginal_username

We have too many books to readily count praising Lee or praising the Wehrmacht to name two classic examples of the losers being glorified after the conflict.

All of the things I named had the losers have played a role in the description of the winners - and depending on where one is from (for example, there are probably more critical books written on the Black Prince in French than in English), a dominant role. Genghis Khan wrecking the irrigation systems of Central Asia and Iran is not exactly lovingly praised, nor is the fall of the Roman Empire generally celebrated despite the fact it could be a perfect example of where “the winners” prevailed completely enough to describe the period after it fell as a success story instead of a dark spot in Western civilization…

The fact that the winners wrote their perspective of events doesn’t mean that “the history books” are only and exclusively a product of their work and the losers wrote nothing, said nothing, believed nothing as relates to WWI.

As far as Edwin goes:

I do think it’s obviously an Aetorian (more specifically than “the winners” because of what you noted) perspective on Edwin, but after reading how Hunter is described, I’m hesitant to say Edwin is being treated as a moral paragon.

It came off to me - this debate on historiography aside - as “Edwin the Incredibly Able”, but not necessarily Edwin the Great Guy.

It seems to regard what happened to Cunaris as perfectly reasonable under the circumstances, but it didn’t read like he was King Arthur or something.


#43858

Well Caz lives there too unless you kick him out, Katrina a secret spy you can track your movement, you might gain new enemies, the weather be sucky, you might find a hidden torture chamber in the fortress, etc


#43859

[quote=“Elfwine, post:43857, topic:2656, full:true”]
The fact that the winners wrote their perspective of events doesn’t mean that “the history books” are only and exclusively a product of their work and the losers wrote nothing, said nothing, believed nothing as relates to WWI. [/quote]

Obviously the phrase isn’t 100% set in stone. You’re taking it far too literally. What it means is that the winners have the greatest influence in how history is written. Only when the winners are gone (when they are conquered, overthrown, reformed, or it was so long ago there’s no point in censoring it) do alternate viewpoints become popular. And obviously there are still exceptions.


#43860

[quote=“Lancer, post:43858, topic:2656, full:true”]
Well Caz lives there too unless you kick him out,[/quote]

My main reason for wanting Leoniscourt is so I can become roomies with Caz, so that’s a plus.

[quote=“Lancer, post:43858, topic:2656, full:true”]
Katrina a secret spy you can track your movement[/quote]

Eh, typical wife stuff.

[quote=“Lancer, post:43858, topic:2656, full:true”]
you might gain new enemies,[/quote]

Yeah, this is probably true. The Duke of Warburton might be pissed that we ‘stole’ Katarina away from him. But to compensate, maybe we will be allowed to forgive Cunaris’s debt (letting us either earn his undying loyalty if he already likes us, or at the very least make peace with him if he hates us.)

[quote=“Lancer, post:43858, topic:2656, full:true”]
the weather be sucky[/quote]

Most of my MCs already live on the Salt Coast, so no change there.

Eh, repurpose it into a lounge or something.


#43861

Honestly the main drawback to a marriage to Katarina (assuming you’re not afraid to get your hands dirty at RTI’s request) is probably gonna be what it takes to actually get her to marry you in the first place. I can’t imagine wooing the most eligible bachelorette in the Kingdom is gonna be easy or remotely cheap, financially or socially.


#43862

Some of the many challenges determining whether or not you’ll make a worthy pawn, uh ally, uh husband is assassinating a Takaran blademaster, concocting a fast acting poison out of herbs commonly found in Kian, murdering all rival suitors, finding the sword of Khalid Kasarojas, beating Sir Caius in a thumb war and the most challenging of all: providing moderately entertaining company at a local ball.


#43863

@unoriginal_username

I’m taking it as a misleading oversimplification at best and unreliable at all times.

There are too many well known examples of the losers having a great role in popular understanding, or the perspective being unflattering to the winners, for me to take how for example much of what we know of Aztec history is through or despite the Spanish as a typical example of how history is told.

Sometimes the winners dominate accounts. Sometimes neither side is in a position to dominate accounts. Sometimes the losers are in a better position to tell things despite losing that conflict.