#the war for gaul

[itmightrain]

"There is no denying that this is a great work of literature, one of the greatest, and at the same time, there should be no denying that it is a bad man's book about his own bad deeds. I think it is the best bad man's book ever written. [...]

The best reasons for not teaching this book to the young are that it gets war exactly right and morals exactly wrong, and that it achieves a crystalline purity of style that looks easy from every angle but proves to be sternly difficult and demanding when faced flat on. [...]

The book pretends to be a set of notebooks, commentarii, the sort of official memos generals sent home to inform their masters of their deeds, the sort historians could come along and use to construct genial and politically agreeable accounts of great events. The style is meant to look simple and to seduce. When we read it, we are meant to think we are getting the plain facts, direct and unvarnished. [...]

Translators of Caesar have always been helpful—much too helpful. Surely, they think, the reader just wants to know what really happened. Caesar would be pleased to think that’s what we think he’s offering."

- Introduction, The War for Gaul by Julius Caesar, a New Translation by James J. O'Donnel

[sebssunshine]

a thing i will never get over is that the dark days only lasted for 3 years. the entire huge war the captiol is always banging on about only lasted THREE YEARS. by the time we’ve reached abosas the games have already been going on 7 years longer than the war did. the captiol punished the districts for a three year war with 75 years of torture and ritual child sacrifice.

[didoofcarthage]

Aureus with female head wearing oak wreath (obverse) and trophy with Gallic shield and carnyx (reverse), minted under Julius Caesar

Roman, Republican Period, after July 13, 48 B.C.

gold

British Museum

[moreespressoformydepresso]

Fandom's Takes On Trauma Are Terrible And Here's Why: brought to you by terrible Coriolanus Snow and Anakin Skywalker discourse

I've been on the verge of making this post for a while now, but I kept not doing it because this might be a bit of a hot take and I don't like offending people. However, I've been growing increasingly annoyed with the perception of one specific character type so lets see how much my dumb opinions stir the pot this time ¯\_(ツ)_/¯. This will be focused mainly on my current main fandom: The Ballad Of Songbirds And Snakes, as well as Star Wars. You'll see why. Now, I need to make it clear that I'm not judging anyone for their opinions on characters for any reason. In no way am I insinuating you're a bad person for having opinions different to mine or that you’re not allowed to have them. What I am saying is that fandoms have some frustrating and frankly insulting beliefs around trauma and those who survived it, and I'm gonna talk about it because I want to get this off my chest. With that said:

Y'all don't understand how trauma works and it annoys me

As stated in the title, I'm writing this because of the Coriolanus Snow discourse, specifically regarding whether he's a good or bad person. Lets rip off the bandaid straight away: He's a bad person. There's no question about it, Snow is a vile human being. And he's one of my favorite characters because of it. He's fantastically written and hands down one of the most realistic, viscerally terrifying yet utterly pathetic villains ever. And what I hate about the TBOSAS fandom more than anything (aside from how some of them treat the actors) is the way they take away all his agency in the story. But I'll put a pin in that because I have a lot to say about him and instead start at the beginning of my growing frustration with how fandom perceives trauma (feel free to skip through this post, I'll label my sections in case you don't wanna read this whole thing). There's two sides, and both are equally stigmatized and wrong. So lets start with the more obvious one through the lens of Anakin Skywalker.

The Star Wars Fandom's Weird Relationship With Traumatized Children Behaving Like Traumatized Children

So Anakin Skywalker AKA Darth Vader is pretty explicitly a Bad Dude who's done some Bad Things. Bro committed genocide, ain't no getting around that, except... It's a little more complicated. Sure, he did all those terrible things, but a lot of people take that to mean he was always a horrible monstrous big bad in the making who was destined to become the galaxy's worst nightmare. That's missing the whole point of the prequel trilogy, because those movies essentially serve to explain all the reasons for Anakin's descent into villainy, and he had surprisingly little hand in it. Growing up into slavery means he not only has a warped view of the galaxy thanks to all the horrors he's witnessed, it also means he lacks the teachings Jedi younglings get when they grow up in the temple. He was pawned off onto Obi-Wan who had only recently been knighted and was in no way ready to raise a child, and became "friends" with Palpatine who fed him all sorts of lies to manipulate him into becoming little more than an attack dog. Not exactly ideal circumstances for a child in their formative years. Did Anakin shirk the Jedi's rules? Yes. Did he do dumb stuff? Yes. But he was a traumatized teenager, of course he's acting out. When he massacres the Tusken Raiders, it's Padme Amidala who reassures him it was the right thing to do. He felt guilty about it, so this idea that he's some apathetic monster from the second he's born is dumb. It's not that Anakin was born wrong, it's that the people around him either failed to help him go down the right path or were actively trying to push him down the wrong one. Anakin never fully grasped the Jedi's ideals, because the person meant to teach him just wasn't equipped to do so. If he'd had someone to teach him how to get a hold of his emotions, distancing himself enough from them to make the best possible decision and helping him understand the importance of letting someone go when you have to, he wouldn't have fallen to the dark side the way he did.

Anakin did terrible things, but blaming it on him just having an evil heart shows a fundamental misunderstanding of how people's environments change who they are. A life in slavery, where he was not allowed to have anything and risked losing what he held dear at any second with no control over it likely caused him to be very possessive of what he held close to his heart once he did have some control over what he kept and lost. Shmi died because he wasn't there to protect her (in his head), so he clung to the people he loved so he could save them the way he couldn't save his mother. Palpatine actively groomed him, if you think that didn't have any effect on him I don't know what to tell you. Throughout the war, he constantly lost people he was close to. That control he had slowly starts to fade as Ahsoka leaves and he starts having dreams about Padme dying. He does everything to save her, only to find out she betrayed him (in his mind, a thought quite likely influenced by PTSD as well). I can tell you that believing one of the few people you trust has betrayed you can make you act very impulsively. Anakin made an impulsive decision and regretted it for the rest of his life. He wasn't born a monster, the world turned him into one.

However, that does not excuse his actions. It explains them and spreads the blame to more people, but his actions are still his actions. Anakin separated himself from his past because of all the pain it brings him, and in doing so he did a lot of bad things. And he still needed to face consequences for those actions, even if the events that led up to them aren't necessarily on him entirely. If he'd gotten therapy, he wouldn't have choked Padme to death. Possibly he wouldn't have attacked the temple. But he didn't, and he did all those things trauma or not. I have major issues with the way some Anti-Anakin parts of the Star Wars fandom insist on ignoring or writing off his trauma, but that doesn't mean I'm absolving him of all guilt.

An explanation is not an excuse, and that sentiment brings us to the reason for this little rant:

Coriolanus Snow's defenders have a habit of infantalizing trauma survivors and I wish they would stop

Oh Snow, how your amazing character completely flew over the heads of most of your loyalest fans. I'm joking, obviously, but also... It's not exactly wrong. Now, I need to make this clear: I'm not insulting Snow fans here. I'm kind of one of them (I hate his guts but I love how he was written, it's a love hate relationship). However, the way people talk about his trauma... I'll be honest, it's kind of sickening for reasons I'll talk about later after getting through the technical(?) stuff. Where the way people view Anakin disgusts me, the way people treat Snow disturbs me. Because people view The Ballad Of Songbirds and Snakes as if it's some typical tragic villain backstory that humanizes and in some ways justifies who he became, to show what changed him from a normal person into a monster. It's not. It actually shows that Snow has always possessed the traits that made him the monster we know from the OG series. What it does is explain why specific things were so important to him and how he grew to lose all redeeming qualities, letting the worst aspects of his personality grow and take over until it's all there's left of him.

What made Snow do stuff like poison political adversaries and constantly beat down the districts so they don't rebel? A thirst for power. A thirst he's always had, born from the feelings of entitlement he held thanks to his family's previous status. He deserves that power in his mind, so he'll do anything to get it. Power, control, and influence are his driving motivators. It's at the back of his mind throughout TBOSAS, and by the time he becomes a gamemaker it's the only motivation he has left. Those traits, the things that pushed him to do what he did, they were always there. There was just more stuff to cover it up. Stuff that fell away with time. Snow is a terrible person, but people pretend he's some poor misunderstood baby who just needed a hug because... why? Because he has trauma. And that's the root of the problem. Does he have trauma? Absolutely. He survived a war, he lost his parents, struggled through poverty while being raised by propaganda from the Capitol and was arguably groomed by Gaul. Sound familiar? It's kind of like Anakin. Horrible childhood filled with loss, less than amazing figures raising him and grooming. Except people use the opposite argument for him which is equally wrong: he's traumatized, so we cannot blame him.

Yes we can.

Trauma does not justify your actions. It might explain them, but you are still accountable for your own actions. Snow murdered people, starting with Bobbin, and every single time it was his choice to do so. It doesn't matter why he made that choice, because he still did it. He ruined countless lives and ended nearly as many, both directly and indirectly. No amount of trauma justifies that. I've seen people claim he's just an anxious young boy who's a poor victim of circumstance, and anyone who doesn't believe so is simply unable to separate the actions of an 80-something-year-old from the 18-year-old, but... No. That's one of the most braindead takes I've ever heard, I'm sorry. Snow hadn't committed the crimes of his older self yet, but the behaviors he shows in TBOSAS are the ones that led him to doing so later on and ignoring that is just stupid. I don't need to judge Snow based on his later actions to call out how fucked up he was in TBOSAS. Again, he chose to murder several people and deluded himself into believing he was justified. That's what makes him a great character. Bad people always believe, on some level, that they're doing the right thing. It's fascinating. But people take his words at face value when he says he's doing the right thing, and the whole point is that he's wrong. He's lying to himself. Because that's what people do sometimes. Snow's family was knocked off its throne, and Snow clung to the idea that the districts are beneath him and at fault to cope with that. He deluded himself into believing Gaul's dumbass theory to justify continuing the games.

It's the exact opposite of Anakin Skywalker: Trauma is relevant, it does inform your perspective on the world and your actions, but it does not mean you can do no wrong. Snow had every chance to be a good person: Knocking Bobbin out or running away instead of murdering him, joining the rebellion with Sejanus, staying in district 12 with Lucy Gray and being honest with her. But he killed Bobbin. He fucked over the rebels and got Sejanus killed. He lied to Lucy Gray and destroyed any chance he had with her. Every chance he got, he threw into the fire without hesitation. Anakin leaned into being a bad person to forget the past, Snow chose to be one because it benefitted him the most. Neither of them are excused because of their trauma, their descent into villainy is simply explained. You know why? Because both of them created new victims. Snow was complicit in the murder of hundreds of children before becoming responsible for thousands more, he killed people with his own hands and ruined several lives over the course of TBOSAS. All that pain he caused isn't erased because we can explain why it happened. Even at 18, Snow has many things he should be held accountable for. War, being an empoverished orphan, being groomed, none of that nullifies the shit he's done. People who say Snow's just an anxious, young, traumatized boy are one side of the horseshoe theory of the myth of "the perfect victim". The "Anakin's Trauma Should Be Ignored Entirely" crowd are the other side. Which brings us to...

It's all horseshoe theory

To conclude the analytical part of my post, I'll bring it back to what I briefly mentioned in the intro to all of this. Agency. That's the running thread here. Both in cases like Anakin and cases like Snow, the fandom takes away all agency a character has in the story for the sake of justifying one's feelings about them. Anakin was born a monster and he was always destined to be evil. It wasn't the trauma, it wasn't the events of the story, he's just bad. On the other hand, Snow is a good person who was made to do terrible things by his trauma. It's all the trauma and nothing else. His bad childhood caused him to be this way and it has nothing to do with his own worst personality traits. See the connection? In both these instances, the characters had no influence over who they became. With Anakin, nothing could've had any influence because he's just born wrong. With Snow, it's everything around him that shaped him into who he was. Both scenarios completely ignore the character and focus on external factors to explain everything. One demonizes trauma victims by saying those that went off the rails are just bad people and there's nothing to be done about it, the other infantilizes trauma survivors by saying they shouldn't be held accountable for their actions just because they have trauma and it's only when they're older and should know better that we can bring consequences down on them.

Victims of trauma should be held accountable, though. The only thing the presence of trauma should change is what kind of accountability. Merely locking them up won't change anything, they should receive help to work through their problems while residing in a place where they cannot hurt anyone else. Including themselves. That is what acknowledging trauma is useful for. But this? This is doing nothing but stigmatizing trauma survivors even more than they already are, and I hate it. And you wanna know why I hate it? Because I've been both sides of this horseshoe, and it nearly got me killed.

The part where I talk about my Tragic Backstory(TM) to explain why this bothers me so much

This'll be a little heavy, so while I'm not gonna go into detail I advise you to please be careful. If you're not in the headspace to handle talk about actual real life mental health issues, feel free to stop reading here. I'm putting this at the end for a reason. If you really wanna know why people's perspective on Snow disturbs me but don't wanna risk getting triggered, skip to the last bold line in this post.

Without going into detail, I've dealt with some pretty big mental health issues throughout my life. One of them is PTSD, so believe me when I say I understand that trauma can heavily influence one's actions in ways even they don't understand. But I had to learn the hard way that there's a difference between explaining and excusing. I used to believe that, because of my previous experiences, I was entirely justified in doing what I was doing. Kind of. At that point, I didn't know that what I was experiencing was PTSD, but I did feel justified in my actions the same way Snow does. I explained every bad thing I did away and wrote it off as nothing or sometimes even as a good thing. Granted, I never did anything as big as committing murder, but I don't live in a country as dark and horrible as Panem so we'll chalk it up to that. As I grew older, I started to recognize the ways in which I accidentally hurt the people around me, and eventually had the realization that my past does not in fact justify the pain I was causing people entirely uninvolved in what happened to me. They had nothing to do with that, and shoving all my pain onto them the way I did was wrong. My view of myself pivoted to the other side of the horseshoe. If I'm not justified, am I... am I bad? Am I evil? Am I just born wrong?

I don't know how to explain this to anyone who hasn't gone through this themself, but that is a horrible feeling to have. To feel like you're just bad and there's nothing you can do about it... It kills something inside of you. A hope, a will to keep going and keep trying. Why bother when you cannot be fixed? I've lost the will to live at two points in my life, and that was one of them. And now I get to see both of these mentalities be repeated by dumbasses who don't understand the first thing about trauma. It's... not fun. It's grating and aggravating in a way I can't accurately bring across with just my words. It makes me wanna scream and laugh hysterically until I cry.

Here's the thing: I relate to Snow, and the way people perceive him disturbs me on a visceral level.

As I said, I justified my own bad behavior the same way he does. I convinced myself I was a blameless poor victim who had no hand in their actions. But just like Snow, I did. Not nearly as much as I would have liked, but I did. I learned to control the defensive mechanisms my trauma gave me, and I grew from it. Seeing people defending Snow with the same arguments that kept me from ever getting over what happened to me, crying out that he's just traumatized so none of it's his fault... it disturbs me. Because they're outsiders who should be able to see the pain he caused others and realize that nothing changes the fact that he did that. But they don't. They're me, without any of the personal stakes that kept me trapped in my own delusions. It's all just fiction, and I know that, but it hits just a little too close to home for my comfort. It's a little too raw and a little too real for me to just let it go and move on again like I always do.

I'm sorry for the rant, I didn't mean to make this post this long but I guess I hope you find something of interest in here that made it worth reading? Have a nice day 💜

[illustratus]

[talesfrommedinastation]

pspspspsp I'm working on a lil' project that unfortunately has been shelved due to longfic work, novel prep, work in general, and the fact that I'm a parent who just got elected to a museum board!

The Bad Batch/Clone Wars....ROMAN EMPIRE AU!

Clone Force 99 (Nonaginta Novem) the auxiliary legion who assists in the rescue of soldier/scholar Resonare (Latin for 'Echo') from deep within enemy lines in Germania. Captain Rex fits in, too.

Man, Rex was MADE for a Roman AU but I digress.

The auxiliary is composed of foreign soldiers who Don't Quite Fit In with the rest of the troops due to their unorthodox methods.

We got a hunter from Mauretania (Hunter), a demolitions expert and builder from Aegyptus (Wrecker), an assassin/sicarii from Judaea (Crosshair), and, of course, a druid/warrior scholar from the Veneti tribe in Gaul.

Yup, that's Tech. And figuring out what to do about his goggles was interesting. But there's always face tattoos.

(I threw in my OC as a Celtic lady from Hibernia because I Freaking Could)

I love studying ancient Gaul and Britain. I blame watching this (kind of terrifying but educational) video while on spring break as a kid:

At some point (8:19) it gets to an animated story with a guy in black robes wearing a deer skull talking about revenge, so, yeah. 'Educational but terrifying' was the average day for us in the 90's.

Anywho, I'm digressing beyond digressing on this fine OC Sunday. Enjoy!

@eyecandyeoz @deezlees @thecoffeelorian @sued134 @techs-stitches @autistic-artistech and all my other OC makers!

[meekmedea]

some things in the time-travelling Clemmie + Coryo unhinged AU because I realize there isn't much explanation, if any haha

Set post TBOSAS, maybe anywhere from their late University years to post University graduation.

Clemensia was never bitten this time, she and Reaper were considered victors for the 10th game - they have this odd, begrudging sort of alliance to friendship.

Coriolanus ends up an intern in the Ravinstill administration, courtesy of Gaul. He seeks out Gaul and impresses her far earlier than the 10th game.

Promising intern vs Pseudo- grandniece/granddaughter

Coryo is sort of Gaul's 'pawn' to keep Clemmie's influence on Max in check. In a way, you could argue it's Volumnia vs Hector, even if Hector is only haunting the narrative.

Because Clemmie gets a bit of leeway with the president, she doesn't have as much as Hector would have had, but enough that the adult Ravinstills are like 👀 👀. She gets away with as much as Felix (the clear favourite of his generation) does.

Max's policies flip between harsh and lenient depending on what is being addressed. Clemmie wants to improve health policies in the Capitol? Okay. Coryo has a plan to wipe 13 off the map for good? He's listening.

The adult Ravinstills worry about Clemmie's influence. Like Coryo is worrisome too, but interns can be fired. Clemmie, not quite the same. Curse the Dovecotes and their charm *shakes fist*

Someone plants the idea that given her influence, maybe Max plans to have her married off to Felix. And will use this excuse to name Felix as heir, which would bypass his uncles/aunts/parents/older cousins. It's illogical, but not impossible.

Given Felix's uninterest in family politics + politics in general, it would really mean Clemmie would be running things, and they will NOT stand for a Dovecote ruling over them. Also, what if Clemmie takes after her grandmother, Cleopatra, and her spouse mysteriously dies? Even more dangerous if it's after they have a kid, because then that kid will be next to be head of House Ravinstill while Clemmie runs things till the kid's majority.

Volumnia (maybe?) or someone suggests to limit that possibility, marry her off. What about Coriolanus? It's a favourable one, given their family names + their standings. Also, that way, even if Clemmie takes after her grandmother, then they'd just be getting rid of Coryo, who's another potential threat.

Coriolanus is probably all for the idea (possibly behind suggesting the idea as well? he does like her in this au.)

What does Max think of all this?

Given Clemmie's adamant confession about disliking Coryo, Max is suspicious of any attempt to have her married off to the blond.

He's like: we need to stop humouring the Snows' delusions.

Dovecotes famously marry for love, so Max is hesitant to arrange her marriage. And he's not really her grandfather/granduncle either, so he has no say in things.

Dovecote side of things:

Given Max's favouritism, Endymion & Aelia know that the President will have a say on 'approving' Clemmie's partner, regardless of lack of blood relation.

Max is adamant that he will see Hector's granddaughter happy + taken care of.

Pretend Ashcote? (With Reaper's permission ofc) She's running out of options and she's grown close enough to Reaper that she's terrified of Coryo turning his eye to him and killing him off. Coryo has probably insinuated the possibility before.

It throws a wrench into Max's plans when he asks her about her plans for the future.

Clemmie: I'm in love with Reaper Ash. Max, with some dread: His name sounds familiar... Clemmie: He was the victor of the 10th games. Max: *spiralling* (why does it always leads back to D11?)

Some fun questions to consider:

Does Clemmie have to commit to the bit and marry Reaper, on the wild off-chance that Max is like: ...sure, if he makes you happy.

Does Coryo commit to his affections (idk what to call it, his obsession?) and decide to take action so he can have her? ie. kill Reaper? kill Max? threaten her into compliance?

Should Clemmie kill Coryo?

Or does he kill her in some highly-twisted idea of if he can't have her, then nobody can?

[deadstarsrisingsblog]

I have to say, I finally picked up the Jedi Quest series and yikes on trikes, nothing on EARTH could prepare me for how desperately I want to pick 14-yr old Anakin up and just shake him.

Every single time this kid opens his mouth, he shoves his foot in it.

On the one hand, could it be the inconsistent writing and the target age-range limiting the narrative? Sure. Does it make Anakin any more likeable? Absolutely not.

In other news, I would die for Tru, Darra, and Ferus. They are *adorable.* And Siri slow-roasting Obi-Wan over an open flame at any given opportunity is my new favourite thing.

Siri: I would die for you.

Also Siri, in the same sentence: get wrecked, bitch.

[catilinas]

wahhh when cicero puts silly little puns in a letter like marce tulli that joke is NOT good. and yet i am smiling at it :’)

[ospreyeamon]

some heads are not fit to wear the crown

Houses Ulgo and Rist’s assassination of Price Gaul and Queen Silara Panteer is one of those decisions where – though murder is wrong, though it triggered great strife – I absolutely understand why they did it. Ulgo and Rist removed what they viewed as dangerously incompetent leadership because they believed it was necessary to protect Alderaan.

The Galactic Republic agreed to sign the Treaty of Coruscant because they lost the Great Galactic War. The Imperial fleet had succeeded in occupying Coruscant’s skies, giving them the ability to launch an orbital bombardment at will, while the Republic lacked the means to dislodge them. Imperial troops had taken the Galactic Senate hostage and killed the Supreme Chancellor. Because the Empire had already been winning the war even before they seized the capital to use as a bargaining chip, the Sith Emperor was the one to set the terms of the frosty peace.

The Treaty of Coruscant was a shockingly good deal for the Republic under the circumstances (which is why many in the Empire were so resentful of it). The only territory the Empire demanded they cede which the Empire had not already occupied or was actively contesting was seven uninhabited star systems, when the Republic did not expect to be able to hold most of those fronts. The Empire had Republic representatives followed around by droids to monitor their adherence to the Treaty, but did not demand any Republic citizens be handed over to stand trial in the Empire for crimes real or invented. Crucially, Empire set no caps on the Republic’s ship building or military expenditure and extracted no economic reparations.

Those like Gaul Panteer, Leontyne Saresh and Elin Garza who publicly decried the Treaty, saying that the Republic should have kept fighting rather than accept peace with the Empire, were in denial about the political reality of the situation. At that time, the Republic had no prospect of being able to swing the tide of the war to put themselves in a stronger position in the peace negotiations. If the Republic had refused to ratify the Treaty the Empire could have levelled its capital, killing billions and decapitating institutions like the SIS headquartered on the planet. The only meaningful blow the Republic was dealt by the Treaty of Coruscant was to its pride.

Bouris Ulgo hated the Sith Empire, but he wasn’t an idiot. The Treaty of Coruscant, humiliating though it may have been, gave the Republic the perfect opportunity to rearm itself in the breathing space provided by the Cold War. The Republic was bigger than the Empire – bigger economy, bigger population – so given the opportunity they could out produce and out recruit the Empire. If the Republic was patient, then they could have their vengeance and victory.

But being protected by the Treaty of Coruscant long enough to rearm required remaining part of the Galactic Republic, because the Empire made the Treaty with the Republic. The moment Alderaan seceded, it was no longer protected by the Empire’s promise to withdraw, and the Imperial Military could launch a second invasion without breaking the Treaty. And why wouldn’t the Sith Empire invade Alderaan? What else did all their forces ordered to break off the attacks on Coruscant and other Republic worlds have to do? Gaul Panteer’s very loud and public removal Alderaan from the Republic must have looked like an open invitation for the Empire to come and conquer some beautiful new camping sites.

And for what? Was Gaul Panteer arrogant enough to believe Alderaan so important that he could manipulate the Republic into abandoning the Treaty of Coruscant? Was he so myopic that he imagined he could sit on Alderaan feeling self-righteous with no consequences he hadn’t considered in the heat of the moment? Did he think that he could leverage Alderaan’s status as a Core Founder to extract concessions from the Republic to undo the cessation and stop opposing the Treaty – is that what his secret negotiations with the Republic were about?

Declaring the secession was an act of short-sighted rage. Failing to walk it back was self-absorbed irresponsibly. He placed his people in the firing line of a second invasion without so much as a warning, let alone a consultation.

Gaul Panteer was Alderaan’s senator, not Alderaan’s head of state. He wasn’t the elected monarch, just the reigning Queen’s heir. The decision to take Alderaan out of the Republic never should have been his to make; the question should have been decided by Queen Silara and the aristocratic assembly at the Elysium (and, if Alderaan were actually a democracy during this period, a general referendum).

This raises the question of why Queen Silara didn’t countermand her son’s declaration of secession. Maybe Gaul inherited his lack of strategic acumen from Silara. Maybe she disagreed with the secession, but decided that it was more important to avoid undermining the son she had appointed senator than to keep Alderaan in the Republic; that risk of House Panteer losing face took precedence over the risk of the planet being invaded. Or maybe Queen Silara, who suddenly fell ill upon her son’s return from Coruscant, lost control over the situation because Gaul took advantage of her poor health to usurp her authority.

Whatever the reasons, House Panteer was not doing a good job of fulfilling one of the most ancient traditional functions of any monarchy: making sure your lands won’t be conquered by an external power. Alderaan’s other great noble houses were not doing a good job of encouraging House Panteer to take their job more seriously. Probably the Elysium was already bogged down in the gridlock which would later prevent them from electing Queen Silara’s successor.

Bouris Ulgo was the head of the Alderaani military, its planetary defence force. It was his job to protect Alderaan from invasion. Gaul Panteer had made that job impossible. House Rist, infamous as spies as well as assassins, agreed with his assessment. Possibly the Rists had gotten wind of the Imperial Diplomatic Services overtures to House Thul.

Bouris Ulgo was a soldier, who had killed many times before in defence of his homeworld. Everyone and their pet Thranta on Alderaan seems to know the Rists are assassins; the nobility tolerating a house of assassins among their number implies a tactic approval of the occasional convenient murder.

To protect Alderaan, Ulgo and Rist decided, Gaul and Silara Panteer had to die. Only by killing them could they instigate the election of a new monarch – a monarch who would return Alderaan to the safety of the Republic before the Empire could take advantage.

According to his lore entry, Bouris Ulgo didn’t return to Alderaan after the Treaty with any ambitions of becoming king. I suspect he came back to see to the wellbeing of his lands and his vassals as he hadn’t been able to after the Battle of Alderaan, to keep an experienced eye on the planet’s defences during Panteer’s foolishness, expecting to soon leave again to assist in the Republic’s preparations for the anticipated second war. While some sources say he intended to usurp House Panteer, if that were true it would have made far more sense from him to announce the imposition of martial law and declare himself king immediately after the Panteers’ assassination while loudly denouncing the murders as obviously the work of the Sith Empire, not wait until it was clear that the election of Queen Silara’s successor had ground to a holt because of the assembly’s bickering and House Thul had appeared, plainly planning on letting the Empire in by the back door.

To me, Bouris Ulgo is a deeply tragic figure because his assessment that he alone of the heads of the Great Houses cared more for the good of Alderaan than petty politics was correct. Unfortunately, he was a military man with a military mindset who lacked the skill at political manipulation to achieve his desired goal of returning Alderaan to the Republic, falling back to military tactics inappropriate to the problem he was attempting to fix out of desperation. It feels unfair that Ulgo should be saddled with blame for the civil war over Panteer, when Gaul Panteer’s decision to secede was the pivotal domino in the chain of events which resulted in Alderaan becoming the stage for an Imperial-Republic proxy war.

It really says something about House Panteer that in their planetary missions they accept both factions’ solicitations of alliance and can be swayed to either side. Organa or Thul, Republic or Empire, Jedi or Sith – one is as good as the other if vengeance on Bouris Ulgo will be reaped.

Gaul Panteer claimed such outrage that the Republic conceded to a frankly beneficial peace with the Sith Empire that he took Alderaan out of the Republic, drastically increasing the odds the Sith Empire would launch another attack on the planet. The surviving members of House Panteer claim such outrage that the heads of their house were assassinated because they put the planet in incredible danger that they are willing to support the Thul puppets of that same Sith Empire Gaul Panteer deemed it unacceptable to compromise with, even at the cost of billions of lives. House Panteer’s effective foreign policy is that the last attacker to have assaulted Castle Panteer is the devil who must be destroyed, regardless of the potential cost to Alderaan. Truly, some heads are not fit to wear the crown.

[0mega-x]

Francis has very good memorisation skills thanks to his childhood. As a young but seemingly immortal gaulish child, he loved to listen to the druids, who considered memorisation as a very important skill. Indeed, they believed that writing down informations was contributing to deteriorate people's memorisation skills, so they refrained from it (and it is believed to be a reason why there is so few Gaulish sources about Gaul).

Francis thus worked on this skill and got very good at it, and it is because of this cultural background that he saw written history as a bad thing. When the Romans, who wrote down everything, came and became the rulers of Gaul, he had a hard time adjusting with the fact that they wrote down stuff (cues in Caesar writing his Commentaries on Gaul). He also refused to learn how to write and only got around to learn how to read and maybe write a few letters. It's only around the 6th century, with Gregory of Tours, that he got around to the idea writing History down, and learning how to write, additionally. I like the idea of young Francis being present when Gregory wrote about the History of the Franks. Him being gallo-roman may have help.

Hence, Francis later put his memory to good use and decided that, as the only one who had any memory of the Gauls, he had to write about them. He had to provide a Gaulish source for their History and customs (while making it clear that writing it down is NOT part of they customs >_>)

[wafflelovingbatgirl]

#1 way to learn the ablative absolute, 2,000 years running

With his memoir having been written, the students suffered Caesar for centuries

[arthurdrakoni]

Flag of the Gallic League

is the flag of the Gallic League. It comes from a world where Carthage won the Punic Wars and crushed Rome. Carthage and Greece did establish some colonies across the Mediterranean, and even sent expeditions up the major rivers of Europe. However, neither created a vast spanning empire the way Rome would have. Gaul remained divided between numerous tribes and city-states. The southern regions saw lots of influence from Carthage and Greece as a result of trading ports. Greco-Carthaginian influence begins to tapper off the further north one travels. Over time, the city-states of Gaul began to establish a series of trading alliances with one another, and this would eventually lead to a political alliance. Thus, the Gallic League was born.  

The thinking was that the city-states of Gaul could do more by pooling their resources than any of them could individually. The city-states are divided into a series of cantons, each of which has a high degree of autonomy. The cantons administer to their personal affairs, while the League government deals with diplomacy and international relations. The League capital constantly moves around. This way, no one canton can wield more influence than the others. The Gallic League has proven to be quite successful, and can easily stand as an equal to major powers such as Carthage, Greece, and Egypt.  

The Gauls have developed a written language using a modified form of the Greek alphabet. Several Greek philosophers have opened schools on the southern coast of Gaul. The Gauls also learned shipwright technics from Carthage, and the first expedition across the Atlantic was lead by Gauls. Gaul established a few colonies in the New World, but the indigenous people were largely able to resist colonization. That said, many indigenous peoples of the Americas did become valuable trading partners for Gaul. Gaul gained considerable wealth by acting as the middle man to the products of the New World. On the whole, the Gallic League is one of the biggest success stories of the world created by Carthage’s victory in the Punic Wars.  

The flag is a green pennon with a gold boar on it. The boar is consider the most important animal to the Gauls, and the green references to the lush forests and fields of Gaul. 

Link to the original flag on my blog: https://drakoniandgriffalco.blogspot.com/2022/05/flag-of-gallic-league.html?m=0

[vervaincircle]

yeah no this is grooming 100%

[moreespressoformydepresso]

So I was thinking (shocker I know) about Gaul's theory about humanity. That people, when cornered, lose their humanity and become monsters. More specifically, I've been having thoughts about the moment that "confirmed" this theory in Snow's head for a while now and decided to put them into words. Which might be a terrible idea, but I never claimed to be smart.

According to Gaul, people who are cornered will do anything to survive and lose all sense of humanity to do so. The Games are supposed to be a constant reminder of this, which already raises a few questions that I was going to pose before getting to my actual thoughts here until it evolved into a whole separate train of thoughts. I'll make it a separate post instead but long story short: If it was supposed to be a reminder of this "truth" it was a sloppy, embarrasing failure at best (and also that's not how science works). Regardless of that though, the moment that solidified this delusion is his brutally murdering Bobbin while escaping the arena with Sejanus. There's a problem though. Or rather, there's several problems. Firstly, Snow chose to bash Bobbin's head in until he was unrecognizable. Chose, because he didn't have to do it. If you want my more interesting/unique(?) thoughts skip the next paragraph.

Most people would have knocked Bobbin out at most and then kept running, Snow chose to keep hitting with the wooden plank. He did this not because he lost all his humanity, but because he is a deeply disturbed individual. His formative years were filled with war and propaganda, and his family's proud name being dragged into the mud by his living situation understandably gave him a complex about power and wealth. He needed to feel above other people to cope, and the Capitol provided. Now, that does not in any way excuse his actions (and if anyone's interested I have several essays worth of thoughts on that and all the ways in which it makes me adore Collins and hate extremes in fandom), but it does explain them. Moreover, that complex and stubborn pride in his family's former high status likely fed into his belief in Gaul's theory. If it's true for someone of his status, it must be true for everyone.

Now, the actual reason for this post

Gaul's theory is that people lose their humanity when they're cornered. Emphasis on cornered here. When people are put under pressure, they will act in depraved ways. From Snow's perspective of reality, this is true because when he was cornered he brutally beat a child to death. But was he cornered though? No. Sure, he was in a scary situation, but he was not cornered. There was one child with a knife chasing after him. A starved, dying one. Snow and Sejanus could've easily outran him with some adrenaline boosting them (that shit makes moms lift whole cars to save their kids, come on now), nevermind the millions of other solutions that aren't "beat a child to death with a wooden plank until they're unrecognizable". More importantly though, they're not stuck in the arena. The peacekeepers didn't actively protect them, but they opened the fence for them. Snow could leave the arena. He could've dodged Bobbin and ran, and he'd have been able to leave the arena without murdering a kid. He was pressed, but he was not cornered. Not only does this theory have the most pathetic "proof" of any scientific theory since Andrew Wakefield's vaccine scam, the incident that confirmed it in Snow's mind isn't even a situation where the theory is applicable in the first place. It doesn't prove that people who are cornered lose their humanity. You know what it does prove, though?

People who have power lose their sense of humanity

Snow was not entirely cornered, but he did have power. As mentioned before, Bobbin is a starving child with nothing but a large knife. Snow might not be well-fed by Capitol standards, but he was certainly doing amazing by district standards. He had a wooden plank and a child at his mercy. What did he do? He maimed and murdered the kid. And throughout the entire book, stuff like this happens. Gaul showed him how the snakes work because he's her favorite prodigy. What did he do? He used it to cheat and help Lucy Gray win. When he had that recording of Sejanus admitting to rebellion, he had power over Sejanus' life. What did he do? He got the guy executed. When he had a gun and Mayfair became a possible problem, he shot her. When he became president, he kept the games going and poisoned anyone in his way because he had the power to do so. Mayfair has the power to influence who gets reaped, and uses it to try and get Lucy Gray killed. It happens on a larger scale too. It's the whole point of the series. The Capitol has all the power, and they use it by abusing and murdering the people from the districts, either to keep them in line or just because they want to. For entertainment. Because they can, and there's nothing the districts can do about it. Coin has power, and what does she do with it? She gets Prim killed to break Katniss into her pawn and suggests to put more innocent children through the Hunger Games because she can. Just like the Capitol did, 75 years before that. They can, so they do it. Who's gonna stop them? It's all over the series. And they all try to justify their actions by blaming it on people. Mayfair’s excuse is getting rid of “competition”, the Capitol claims the districts are getting what’s coming to them for the rebellion, Coin claims this new version of the games is what the rebellion wants. Snow has all his mental gymnastics.

It's not desperation that turns people into monsters, it's power.

And those with power will always convince themselves it's not the power, it's the people.

[illustratus]

The Prisoners, scene from the Conquest of Gaul by Julius Caesar