[LMB] OT: Saudi Arabia more democratic than Barrayar

phoenix at ugcs.caltech.edu phoenix at ugcs.caltech.edu
Mon Sep 26 05:59:22 BST 2011

On Sun, Sep 25, 2011 at 07:53:00PM -0600, Pat Mathews wrote:
> > >>> How long has Barrayar been anything you could call a nation,
> > >>> rather than a collection of 60 petty principalities?

> > >> Interesting question.   I wonder if there are historical nations
> > >> on Earth where such a question is debatable.

India.  You sometimes had large empires but usually not for long and
almost never incorporating the southern tip of Kerala and Tamil Nadu.
The name India comes from the Indus, which is now in Pakistan, and
"Hindustan" mean the Indes and Ganges -- all in north India.  Bangladesh
is East Bengal, drawing on the Ganges and Bramaputra rivers.  The
'dagger' that stands out on map is south of all that.  There's some
element of shared religion and culture, but not a unified past.

Colonialism in general left behind a lot of borders with not much in the
way of deep past or even sense.

> I note "The Germanies" were what resulted when "The Holy Roman Empire"
> became, essentially, a name only. Did the Italian petty states form in
> the Renaissance, or during and after the breakup of the Roman Empire?
> Because I may be seeing a pattern here. 

Was the Holy Roman Empire ever more than a name? Under Charlemagne, I
guess.  But I guess it could be a model.

Italian city-states grew around seeds of Roman cities, with the
exception of Venice, but I'm not sure how much political continuity is

-xx- Damien X-) 

More information about the Lois-Bujold mailing list