Persia still a theocracy, sigh. Why is 1979 Iran time travelling to the Renaissance? Did they steal the Aztec Time Machine?
time saw them as a holy man also ( not god-like beings like pharaohs of ancient egypt or tzars but kind of holy)
Erm what tsars are you talking about in particular?
Persia was not a theocracy until 1979. At best a theocracy monarchy
Erm what tsars are you talking about in particular?
Peter the Great was the antichrist. :laugh:
according to the book "Peter the Great: His life and world" written by "Robert K. Massie" tzars (or tsars) were holy men and god-like to the russian ppl of their time. ofc they didnt worship them! but they were thought as holy and saint and etc, just not worshiped...
In every country which had most of its population living as serfs (which includes all 3 nations that had tsars, that i can think of right now) monarchs were often seen as almost magical beings. It doesnt mean that they were worshiped as gods or god like beings, it merely has to do with their shiny clothes and wealthy lifestyle appearing like a divine spectacle to common serfs who have never seen anything as pretty (of course this is an oversimplification). Further more, just like in Vicky 2, when you have a serf-heavy society, most of the times you also have a powerful clergy that preaches to these serfs (and keeps them in line for the tsars) and of course, in such situation, the best propaganda that clergy can serve are stories about piety/virtue of their noble tsars and their holy-like devotion to God etc bla bla bla. So today, all those centuries later, in many countries (Orthodox for example) youll have kings and tsars canonized as saints, thats how the "system" worked back in those days (and one of the reasons commies dealt with religion as harshly as they did) and thats what the quoted author was talking about.
What you said specifically was "( not god-like beings like pharaohs of ancient egypt or tzars but kind of holy)" alludes that tsars were god-like beings like/equal to pharaohs, which i, in my humble opinion as it is, consider wrong. Coming from a country that had one single tsar, i can even imagine some Ruskies being offended.
edit: if you wanna nit pick, some monarchs in the western Europe, who were both secular and religious heads of state, fit way more into comparison with pharaohs than anything we had in the east, even the most extreme examples (of course even that comparison is horribly wrong).
Except that all the Norwegians will be blowing the year's booze budget that dayDont want to make a new thread so I'll say it here; this coming Friday will be perfect for having a dev diary about Norway!
actually the safavid persia was a theocracy. the king was some kind of religous head
Norway:
1. Loyal Vassal - 5% extra tax efficiency when a vassal of either Sweden or Denmark.
2. Greenland Forgotten - minus 20% colonial range, -1 revolt risk.
3. Viking ennui - -1 revolt risk
4. Winter reading - -1% tech cost
5. Winter Bjork - +1 revolt risk
6. er that's it.
That proverb means that in everyday life of your average serfs, in his system of reference, there are 2 different things: theres divine - only god and sky are above me (we, Slavs, are obsessed with skies for some reason) - and there is earthly - king/tsar is the head of my country, sent here by god bla bla bla. It doesnt mean that tsar is literally Jesus or Saint Peter-like person, touched by god walking the earth turning water into wine with his fart, no it merely means once acceptance of the social order (in other words saying "i know my place - which isnt to think/decide, but to do what im told").
In my people's history the same thing later turned into "god and king", "god and country" and finally culminated with "Tito and the (communist) party". Strong desire to bring some meaning/order into everyday's life.
Safavid is a dynastic name, Persia was no more a theocracy than the church of England was after the establishment of the Church of England, yes the monarch was a religious head but he was succeeded by his son.
I really don't understand why the Devs won't fix this anachronism or at least give Persia a unique government. They must notice all the Safavids when their writing the history files, but then in game after your first ruler dies the Safavid dynasty disappears and you get some generically named nobody.