|
Tom Rogers
07-23-2014
17:09 UT
|
David Sooby wrote:
> I don't know if you've already identified
the artist, but someone on the comic strip collector's discussion list
said it is Leo Morey.
You are correct, Sir! It is indeed a piece by Leo Morey.
|
|
David Sooby
07-23-2014
00:32 UT
|
On 7/20/2014 9:02 PM, QT - David Johnson wrote:
> Huh, turns out it's an interior illustration from the January 1962
> edition of ~Analog~ in which "Naudsonce" was published:
> http://www.gutenberg.org/files/19076/19076-h/19076-h.htm Odd (but I
> knew it looked familiar).
I
don't know if you've already identified the artist, but someone on the
comic strip collector's discussion list said it is Leo Morey.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Clear ether!
David "Lensman" Sooby
|
|
David Johnson
07-21-2014
03:02 UT
|
~
> Aegypan ~Four-Day Planet~ cover illustration?
Huh, turns out it's an interior illustration from the January 1962 edition of ~Analog~ in which "Naudsonce" was published:
http://www.gutenberg.org/files/19076/19076-h/19076-h.htm
Odd (but I knew it looked familiar).
David
--
"You
had a wonderful civilization here. . . . You could have made almost
anything of it. But it's too late now. You've torn down the gates; the
barbarians are in." - Lucas Trask (H. Beam Piper), ~Space Viking~ ~
|
|
|
Spam deleted by QuickTopic 07-20-2014 06:08
|
David "PiperFan" Johnson  07-18-2014
15:24 UT
|
~
Jonathan Crocker wrote:
> And you're right that the Space Viking
> pinnaces could travel 'as far and as fast'
> as they ships they launched from, but you
> could argue that this was because they
> were new, like the yacht from "When in
> the course..." was a newer ship, and the
> Stellex was an old, worn down ship that
> had only been sold because the prior
> owners could no longer get her insured.
One
thing to keep in mind is that the Space Viking era is a time of
technological stagnation. Even with two billion people an independent
"civilized world" like Marduk was in no position to maintain the same
industrial enterprise as did the Terran Federation (or the Empire in the
centuries afterward). It's likely that the Sword Worlds--and the
"civilized worlds" of the Old Federation (which could not cooperate as
they did when they were all in the Federation)--were doing everything
they could simply to _maintain_ a given level of technological
capability, including hyperspace drive.
Sure, perhaps there were
minor variations in the capabilities of the ~Nemesis~ as compared to the
~Princess of Lyonesse~ which raided Beowulf sixty years earlier, but
the fact remains that hyperdrive technology is the leading edge of
technological capability in the Space Viking era. Indeed, it is the key
distinguishing factor for a "civilized world" and even when a planet
like Beowulf or Amaterasu developed their own hyperdrive ships, they did
it on the basis of a combination of old Federation records and Space
Viking assistance. No one was "innovating" hyperdrive technology in the
Space Viking era.
Bottom line is, this is not the age to be
making generalized assessments about hyperdrive technology or Beam's
approach to technological capabilities generally in any given era. Beam
was great at using subtle cues--consider the different roles played by
women in the early Federation and the Space Viking era (there is no
"Sachiko Koremitsu" among the Vikings!)--to illustrate the details of
the different societies and civilizations he was portraying throughout
the Terro-human Future History. Surely he did this with his portrayal
of technology too.
Be well,
David
--
"A lot of
technicians are girls, and when work gets slack, they're always the
first ones to get shoved out of jobs." - Sylvie Jacquemont (H. Beam
Piper), ~The Cosmic Computer~
~
|
|
Jonathan Crocker
07-18-2014
04:46 UT
|
(sorry if the reply bits are out of whack, the board won't let me
follow the link from my email so I copy and paste from the board.)
On 7/17/2014 22:24 UT, QT - David Sooby wrote:
>Note
also that in /Space Viking/, the ill-maintained, older /Lamia/ travels
right along with the brand-spanking-new /Nemesis/ on >their
interstellar raids. Do you think Trask slowed down the /Nemesis/ so the
/Lamia/ could keep up?
He would if he wanted them to work closely together.
And
you're right that the Space Viking pinnaces could travel 'as far and as
fast' as they ships they launched from, but you could argue that this
was because they were new, like the yacht from "When in the course..."
was a newer ship, and the Stellex was an old, worn down ship that had
only been sold because the prior owners could no longer get her insured.
>That hardly seems likely, and if he did, then Harkaman would have been complaining about it.
Maybe
he complained bitterly about it "off camera". Piper did leave some
things out of the books, there were no bathroom scenes for example and
even Real Space Vikings have to pee from time to time.
Maybe that
was the reason the Lamia was refitted as a system defense monitor with
her hyperdrives ripped out & replaced by weapons.
>Likewise,
the scene where Trask's armada travels from Tanith to attack Marduk
makes it clear that all the ships, regardless of >what world they
were built on, travel at exactly the same speed, and all arrive
simultaneously.
They did coordinate a bit, I'm certain.
But
again, you can make what you like of it - you can decide that the
physical laws only allow travel at a certain speed through hyperspace
and any engine over a certain minimum is up to the job.
Or you
can decide that the Vikings liked to build all their ships with a good
power-to-mass ratio that let them move fast and raid quickly, and that
Harkaman was chewing the walls so much at the slow speed his ship was
forced to adopt that he never operated with the Lamia again. And he had
her drives ripped out to make sure of it, by the expurgated
unprintability!
|
|
David Sooby
07-18-2014
03:55 UT
|
On 7/17/2014 9:34 PM, QT - David Sooby wrote:
> Well, that certainly disproves what I was asserting: that all ships of
> an era traveling at exactly the same speed. Doesn't seem to match
> anything at all in /Space Viking/, however...
Upon
reconsideration, I think I came to the wrong conclusion here. The
reference cited where ships had different speeds in hyperspace based on
mass/power ratio is from "When in the Course--", which is not listed in
Piper's "The Future History" article. I've always been a bit
uncomfortable
about accepting that as a canonical story, as Piper decided not to
publish it, and re-wrote it as the first Kalvan story.
Unless
someone comes up with a citation in another THFH story where different
ships are said to have different speeds, or that the speed is dependent
on something individual to the ship (power/mass ratio or anything
else), then I'm going to assume Piper didn't feel bound by what he had
written in a story he decided not to publish. I'm going to revert to
my original interpretation, which is that in the Piperverse, every ship
of the era had the same speed thru hyperspace.
~~~~~~~~~~~~
Clear ether!
Lensman
|
David "PiperFan" Johnson 07-18-2014
03:50 UT
|
~
Jonathan Crocker wrote:
> Nancy asks "Wait a minute. How long's
> this voyage going to take? Six months,
> isn't it?"
>
> "No, that's what it would take the Stellex.
> Voortrekker has a lot lower mass-to-power
> ratio, and better Dillinghams. About four
> months."
>
> That would imply a lot of variables, just like
> you'd expect from someone with Piper's eye
> to detail.
Back
on the old Piper List someone (I want to say it was William Taylor, but
my memory is hazy) posted a table that showed the progression of
hypership speeds throughout the course of Federation-Space Viking-Empire
history that showed, with lots of caveats and exceptions, a general
increase in (reported) hypership speed over time.
Beam wasn't
always consistent across the dozen or so yarns he published between 1952
and 1964 (especially given that he did not write them in chronological
order) but it seems clear he accounted for variations in hypership
speeds/capabilities over time and among different types of ships in any
given era.
Be well,
David
--
"We talk glibly about
ten to the hundredth power, but emotionally we still count, 'One, Two,
Three, Many.'" - Otto Harkaman (H. Beam Piper), ~Space Viking~
~
|
|
David Sooby
07-18-2014
03:34 UT
|
On 7/17/2014 6:53 PM, QT - Jonathan Crocker wrote:
> But I was able to find a few facts. In the short story
> Federataion, Nancy asks "Wait a minute. How long's this voyage
> going to take? Six months, isn't it?"
>
> "No, that's what it would take the Stellex. Voortrekker has a
> lot lower mass-to-power ratio, and better Dillinghams. About
> four months."
>
> That would imply a lot of variables, just like you'd expect from
> someone with Piper's eye to detail.
>
> And earlier in the story the doctor was waxing poetic about how
> "We and the Freyans started from two different puddles of living
> slime seven hundred light-years apart."
>
> So - Stellex at six months travels at 0.162 light years per
> hour, while the yacht Voortrekker can make 0.243 light years per
> hour, much less than the speed of a ship in Space Viking.
Well, that certainly disproves what I was asserting: that all ships of an era traveling at exactly the same speed.
Doesn't
seem to match anything at all in /Space Viking/, however, where even a
pinnace appears to have the same travel time from Marduk to Tanith as a
capital Viking warship. Unless we want to just throw up our hands and
say Piper was being inconsistent-- which perhaps he was, but this
hardly helps us develop a self-consistent interpretation of canon--
then it appears the technology of hyperdrive changed rather radically
between that earlier Federation era story, and /Space Viking/.
~~~~~~~~~~~~
Clear ether!
Lensman
|
|
David Sooby
07-18-2014
03:24 UT
|
On 7/17/2014 11:03 AM, QT - David PiperFan Johnson wrote:
> it seems silly to assume that all ships in a given era travel at the
>
same top speed, if for no other reason than that at any given time
> all of the operating starships would not have been laid down at the
> same time, with possibly years or even decades separating the
oldest > from the newest.
Hmmm... David, I suggest you go
back and skim thru /Space Viking/. Interstellar travel times for ships
are always estimated on the distance alone, with no account taken for
what ship it is. In many cases, those doing the estimating have no
idea what ship is doing the traveling, so even if everyone has a
reference book of ships to consult with each ship's precise speed
clearly stated... which seems rather unlikely... it still wouldn't be
sufficient to explain how everyone can always
accurately estimate another ship's travel time.
Note
also that in /Space Viking/, the ill-maintained, older /Lamia/ travels
right along with the brand-spanking-new /Nemesis/ on their
interstellar raids. Do you think Trask slowed down the /Nemesis/ so the
/Lamia/ could keep up? That hardly seems likely, and if he did, then
Harkaman would have been complaining about it. Likewise, the scene
where Trask's armada travels from Tanith to attack Marduk makes it clear
that all the ships, regardless of what world they were built on,
travel at exactly the same speed, and all arrive simultaneously.
Yes,
ships centuries later-- in the Imperial era-- travel faster. We don't
know if ship speeds increased extremely gradually, or if there was some
sudden tech improvement that increased speed substantially all at
once. But either way, I think it's inescapable to conclude that the
ship's speed is dependent only on the technology existent when its
Dillingham drive was built, or last rebuilt. And that nothing else
affects its speed; not its size, mass, or how much freight it's loaded
with.
Regarding the increase in speed between Federation era
stories and those in the later Imperial era, there is more than
sufficient time between those two eras for every ship still operating
to have been upgraded, possibly multiple times. And if you think about
it, that makes sense. If a ship is worth paying the expense of upkeep
and operating it, then it's worth upgrading. If it's not upgraded,
then it will cease to be competitive with ships which have been
upgraded... and hence, it's no longer worth operating.
~~~~~~~~~~~~
Clear ether!
Lensman
|
|
Jonathan Crocker
07-18-2014
00:53 UT
|
I had a quick look through a couple books, but there aren't that many
simple declarative statements about ship speeds through hyperspace.
Viking's ships seem the quickest at one light-year per hour.
But
I was able to find a few facts. In the short story Federataion, Nancy
asks "Wait a minute. How long's this voyage going to take? Six months,
isn't it?"
"No, that's what it would take the Stellex.
Voortrekker has a lot lower mass-to-power ratio, and better Dillinghams.
About four months."
That would imply a lot of variables, just like you'd expect from someone with Piper's eye to detail.
And
earlier in the story the doctor was waxing poetic about how "We and the
Freyans started from two different puddles of living slime seven
hundred light-years apart."
So - Stellex at six months travels at
0.162 light years per hour, while the yacht Voortrekker can make 0.243
light years per hour, much less than the speed of a ship in Space
Viking.
Both are still faster than a Traveller jump-6 ship, the
best available drive. And, as shown in Viking, Piper's ships can travel
for months at a time without a break.
|
David "PiperFan" Johnson 07-17-2014
17:03 UT
|
~
Talking a lot more about Traveller than Piper, David Sooby wrote:
> So, in Traveller, there are very fast ships for
> couriers, relatively fast ships for top-rate
> passenger ships, and probably slow ships for
> bulk freighters. So that's another difference
> between the universes of Traveller and the
> Piperverse.
Actually,
we don't know this is a difference and it seems an odd assumption to
assume so. The best we ever get in the Terro-human Human Future history
are general statements about the speed of starships (and almost never
about military ships, particularly in the Federation era--well there is
the TFN ~Simon Bolivar~ which takes Anton Gerritt back to Terra, but
it's not clear whether that ship actually travels at a higher speed than
commercial liners like ~Cape Canaveral~ or merely makes fewer
intermediate stops along the way).
What we do get are indications
that there are different "classes" or "quality" of ships--like the
"tramp freighter" ~Andromeda~ which ends up being locally-chartered to
explore the Gamma system, a very different sort of ship from the ~City
of Asgard~ which brought Conn home to Poictesme. We have no idea
whether or not these two ships have the same top speed but it seems
silly to assume that all ships in a given era travel at the same top
speed, if for no other reason than that at any given time all of the
operating starships would not have been laid down at the same time, with
possibly years or even decades separating the oldest from the newest.
What
seems more likely is that there are faster and slower starships in any
given era--and it's certainly even possible that the government and
other "advanced" users likely have starships that travel faster than the
"generally reported" speed we hear about in any given yarn.
Indeed,
even when Klem Zareff talks about "communications lag" during the
System States War we get no indication whether or not the speed of this
"lag" is comparable to that experienced by other, non-military efforts
of the same era.
YMMV,
David
--
"I was born in
Antarctica, on Terra. The water's a little too cold to do much swimming
there. And I've spent most of my time since then in central Argentine,
in the pampas country." - Glenn Murell (H. Beam Piper), ~Four-Day
Planet~
~
|
|
David Sooby
07-17-2014
04:03 UT
|
On 7/16/2014 8:51 PM, QT - Jonathan Crocker wrote:
> By the time of Space Viking, Piper's ships are actually much
> faster than anything in Traveller - a ship in hyperspace logged
> a light-year per hour. All Traveller jump drives take a week
> for jump so 168 hours +/- 10%, and the jump-1 drive jumps you
> one parsec [3.26 light years] all the way up to jump-6 taking
> you 6 parsecs.
>
> Which means a top-flight jump-6 drive gets you 19.56 light years
> in 168 hours. By that time, the Nemesis has hypered in, sacked
> your home base, and has gone home for tea before the Traveller
> ships have completed one leg of the trip.
>
> But the time lag is crucial in both universes, leading to
> decentralized states.
Thanks, Jonathan... I was too lazy to dig out my Traveller rules and check the actual speeds.
And
I could kick myself for forgetting until after I made my last post
that in Traveller, not all ships travel at the same speed in hyperspace.
Jump-6 is six times faster than jump-1? That's quite a difference
indeed, and even jump-6 isn't the top speed, altho it's the speed used
by the mail service. (I got the impression in the original Traveller
that the mail service used jump-6 because faster ships were
prohibitively
expensive, but MegaTraveller has another explanation, possibly a
retcon: That the Imperial family and possibly super-rich merchant
princes enjoyed the advantage over the common folk of having their
mail/messages delivered even faster, by a secret network of ultra-fast
courier ships.)
So, in Traveller, there are very fast ships
for couriers, relatively fast ships for top-rate passenger ships, and
probably slow ships for bulk freighters. So that's another difference
between the universes of Traveller and the Piperverse.
But
okay, Traveller ships are slower. But here's another difference: In
Traveller, ships travel in "jumps". Not instantaneous to an outside
observer, but-- I'm pretty sure I'm remembering this correctly-- inside
the ship, no time passes during a jump. So, Traveller ships need far
less in life support, and food and water carried. Only enough to go
from planet to the distance necessary to enter hyperspace, and then on
the other end of the jump, from the re-entry point to landing on the
planet. Plus whatever they think is necessary for emergency supplies.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Clear ether!
David "Lensman" Sooby
|
David "PiperFan" Johnson 07-17-2014
03:06 UT
|
~
Jonathan Crocker wrote:
> Another big difference would be the scale
> of the ships - players in Traveller can easily
> own merchant ships of 100 or 200
> displacement tons, but they're roughly a
> hundred feet long, a far cry from the 1000
> foot globe of the Stellex that found Freya,
> or the 3000 foot globes of later times.
There's a pretty cool essay--with a wonderful comparative graphic--here:
http://www.enderra.com/2011/10/14/starsship-sizes/
Enjoy,
David
--
"We
talk glibly about ten to the hundredth power, but emotionally we still
count, 'One, Two, Three, Many.'" - Otto Harkaman (H. Beam Piper), ~Space
Viking~
~
|
|
Jonathan Crocker
07-17-2014
02:51 UT
|
Wow, "adventures in amortization" - that's just odd. Why, I can't
believe you didn't go back - the second session was probably life
insurance policies for the party members - don't forget the 'death by
misadventure' rider!!!
I don't think the stories would change
much in Piper's universe if the economics were different, he'd have just
found different details to use to set up the story he wanted to tell. I
thought it was interesting though.
By the time of Space Viking,
Piper's ships are actually much faster than anything in Traveller - a
ship in hyperspace logged a light-year per hour. All Traveller jump
drives take a week for jump so 168 hours +/- 10%, and the jump-1 drive
jumps you one parsec [3.26 light years] all the way up to jump-6 taking
you 6 parsecs.
Which means a top-flight jump-6 drive gets you
19.56 light years in 168 hours. By that time, the Nemesis has hypered
in, sacked your home base, and has gone home for tea before the
Traveller ships have completed one leg of the trip.
But the time lag is crucial in both universes, leading to decentralized states.
I
had forgotten about some of the one-industry worlds - Yggdrasil and
Fenris and the like. I think the two setups are very similar, just the
Piper universe doesn't have worlds clustered as thickly.
Another
big difference would be the scale of the ships - players in Traveller
can easily own merchant ships of 100 or 200 displacement tons, but
they're roughly a hundred feet long, a far cry from the 1000 foot globe
of the Stellex that found Freya, or the 3000 foot globes of later times.
|
David "PiperFan" Johnson 07-16-2014
15:40 UT
|
~
Jonathan Crocker wrote:
> In Piper's Federation, a colony world was settled, it
> imported everything, then as it grew its own
> industries [remember Victor Grego's pride at his
> Company Report to the Terran stockholders, listing
> everything the CZC now produced] matured to the
> point that the only things that world needed to
> import were the luxuries that couldn't be had
> locally.
Yes,
that was the model on a world like Zarathustra where there was no major
natural resource extraction effort. Terrans settled (a planet like)
Zarathustra because it had pleasant ecosphere and then exported luxury
local items--sunstones, in the case of Zarathustra -until it developed
its economy to a point of self-sufficiency. (One suspects this took a
very long time when things like financial services are taken into
account. Perhaps worlds like Zarathustra--and Poictesme--never escaped
the tendrils of the off-world Banking Cartel.)
But on other
worlds natural resources extraction was the primary economic activity.
Niflheim (or "Nifflheim" in most yarns except ~Uller Uprising~ and
"Graveyard of Dreams") is the best example but this was also the case on
other inhabitable worlds, particularly those with a native sophont
species which was displaced in order to get at local natural resources.
In
other words, the economy of the Terran Federation was remarkably
diverse. We get few first-hand details of major Federation worlds like
Terra but apparently they were rapacious industrialized worlds which
required basic natural resources (like uranium) in amounts large enough
to support interstellar trade. Luxury goods--like Zarathustran
sunstones or Poicstesme liquors--just "came along for the ride."
> This process had dictated the first economic
> slump on Poictesme, for example. Piper's
> interstellar trade cost so much that whenever
> something could be produced locally, it was.
I
think this was because the Terran Federation economy was basically a
core of industrialized worlds supported by "colonies" from which natural
resources were extracted. Everything else we see--Zarathustran
sunstones, Poictesme liquors, tallow-wax from Fenris--was "gravy."
One
suspects, as well, that there was a political element to this as well.
The economic dependence of colonial worlds upon Terra for manufactured
goods and advanced services fostered the political control of the Terran
Federation.
> Contrast this with the economic setup in
> the Traveller game - the 11 000 worlds of
> the Third Imperium, many of them ruthlessly
> specialized to export goods in a certain
> niche to maximize production and maximize
> trade volume and therefore profits.
>
> Both entirely fictional, both make sense
> within the ground rules established in their
> respective universes.
I
think this "Traveller" model is actually more like the "Terran
Federation" model than it might seem at first. The main difference is
that there were many "industrial hubs" spread throughout those 11,000
worlds of Traveller's Third Imperium. In some sense, the Terran
Federation could be seen as a sort of economic microcosm or regional
setting of the Third Imperium. (This shouldn't surprise us as Beam's
Terro-human Future History was a source of inspiration for the folks who
created Traveller.)
Be well,
David
--
"We talk
glibly about ten to the hundredth power, but emotionally we still count,
'One, Two, Three, Many.'" - Otto Harkaman (H. Beam Piper), ~Space
Viking~
~
|
|
David Sooby
07-16-2014
11:46 UT
|
On 7/15/2014 11:02 PM, QT - Jonathan Crocker wrote:
> --QT-------------------------------------------------------------
> Reply by email or visit
> http://www.quicktopic.com/42/H/tnfVKeAH3s4T/m1061
> ------------------------------------------------------------- ---
>
> Interstellar trade.
>
> <snippage>
>
> Granted, in the Traveller game, the universe was built so that
> players could make their characters earn money.
>
> But given the amount of trade increase from the 40s and 50s when
> Piper wrote, to the late 70s/early 80s when Traveller came out,
>
> http://www.statista.com/statistics/264682/worldwide-export-volum
> e-in-the-trade-since-1950/
>
> is this less of a storytelling device than it is a product of
> the times they were written?
Well,
I played Traveller a few times, but thank FooFoo (or, if you prefer,
the Flying Spaghetti Monster... bless His noodly appendages!) we never
got into the mechanics of financing trade. I did play one session of
another spacefaring role-playing game-- was that "Space Quest" or "Star
Quest"?-- in which most of the players were teenage rich kids. During
our first playing session, they spent literally hours discussing the
fine points of how to amortize the group's starship, completely
ignoring us two older fans (myself an another friend who was also a
long-time role-playing gamer) when we pointedly complained that "Games
are supposed to be fun; this isn't fun." Not surprisingly, neither my
friend nor I bothered to return to that group.
I guess the
relevant question here is: How would the Piperverse be different if
interstellar trade was faster and cheaper? I'm not sure it's actually
that much cheaper in Traveller-- maybe so, maybe not-- but it certainly
is faster, and that alone would increase trade. If nothing else, it
would reduce the amount you'd have to pay crews per trip, and it would
make returns on investments that much faster... which means more
profitable. Well, obviously if it was faster and/or cheaper, there
would be a lot more of it. A lot more interstellar passenger travel,
too. Therefore a lot more emigration, a lot more of people moving from
one world to another to find work. Note how the military situation
would be very different if interstellar travel was a lot faster. Much
of the plot of /Space Viking/ depends on the slow pace of information
traveling from one world to another. Much faster communication would
change things a lot, and would change that story a lot.
Faster
interstellar communications would make centralized control of a
Federation/Empire a lot easier. Perhaps the Federation wouldn't have
fallen apart, or at least it would have taken a lot longer to break down
after it started to decline. Central control is a lot easier to
maintain if you can quickly send large fleets from your navy to put down
rebellion. I would argue that the System States war would never have
happened; the insurrection would have been put down long before it grew
to an interstellar alliance. (But I suppose that scenario could still
work, if the rebellion was planned by a small number of leaders and
Navy officers, who were able to keep their plans secret for some
years.)
Traveller also has an imperial service specifically
dedicated to carrying mail, with a standard ship design for starships
carrying that mail. Again, interstellar communication in that universe
is much faster and generally more reliable. Realistically, it's hard
to imagine the Piperverse doesn't have such mail ships. Heck, in our
own history, carrying air mail was a very important part of the
development of airplanes and companies that made them. In a previous
era, mail was carried on regular overseas routes by fast packet ships.
That, at the very least, is something we should see in the Federation,
even if they don't have a fleet of interstellar ships dedicated to
carrying mail.
Note also that Merlin's ability to predict future
events was limited by the slow pace of information traveling from
distant worlds. With faster interstellar communication, Merlin's
predictive ability improves.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Clear ether!
David "Lensman" Sooby
|
|
Jonathan Crocker
07-16-2014
05:02 UT
|
Interstellar trade.
A conversation with a friend got me thinking.
In Piper's Federation, a colony world was settled, it imported
everything, then as it grew its own industries [remember Victor Grego's
pride at his Company Report to the Terran stockholders, listing
everything the CZC now produced] matured to the point that the only
things that world needed to import were the luxuries that couldn't be
had locally. This process had dictated the first economic slump on
Poictesme, for example. Piper's interstellar trade cost so much that
whenever something could be produced locally, it was.
Contrast
this with the economic setup in the Traveller game - the 11 000 worlds
of the Third Imperium, many of them ruthlessly specialized to export
goods in a certain niche to maximize production and maximize trade
volume and therefore profits.
Both entirely fictional, both make sense within the ground rules established in their respective universes.
Granted, in the Traveller game, the universe was built so that players could make their characters earn money.
But
given the amount of trade increase from the 40s and 50s when Piper
wrote, to the late 70s/early 80s when Traveller came out,
http://www.statista.com/statistics/264682/...e-trade-since-1950/
is this less of a storytelling device than it is a product of the times they were written?
|
David "PiperFan" Johnson 07-07-2014
23:11 UT
|
~
Tom Rogers wrote:
> > So, I'm guessing, "Khalid ib'n Hussein" was very
> > much an assumed name intended to harken back
> > both to Hussein ib'n Ali and to the early Caliphs
> > of the 7th Century.
>
> Indeed. Today, back on out timeline, Caliph Ibrahim
> announced his true name ... Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi
> al-husseini al-qurashi...
Which,
again, simply attests to Beam's craft as a writer: his attention to
detail, with even a relatively small idea--in this case, that of the
Islamic Caliphate in the run-up to the (first) Terran Federation--being
rich in historical insight.
Be well,
David
--
"Oh,
my people had many gods. There was Conformity, and Authority, and
Expense Account, and Opinion. And there was Status, whose symbols were
many, and who rode in the great chariot Cadillac, which was almost a god
itself. And there was Atom-bomb, the dread destroyer, who would some
day come to end the world. None were very good gods, and I worshiped
none of them.” - Calvin Morrison (H. Beam Piper), ~Lord Kalvan of
Otherwhen~
~
|
|
Tom Rogers
07-07-2014
12:09 UT
|
A nice piece on Harry Turtledove in The Atlantic which cites and quotes Piper's "He Walked Around The Horses."
http://www.theatlantic.com/international/a...picks=true#comments
|
|
Tom Rogers
07-07-2014
02:33 UT
|
~ David Johnson wrote (in response to David Sooby's post): >Point
taken. Let's recall that "Hussein" (ib'n Ali) was the name of the
Hashemite monarch who proclaimed what historians call the "Sharifian
Caliphate" after the >Ottoman Caliphate was abolished. Thus "ib'n
Hussein"--"son of Hussein"--might be a name that was chosen by a
successor of the old Caliph Hussein. And Khalid > ib'n Walid, the
"Sword of Allah," was a Companion of the Prophet and commander of the
military forces of the early Caliphates which followed the death of
>Mohammed. So, I'm guessing, "Khalid ib'n Hussein" was very much an
assumed name intended to harken back both to Hussein ib'n Ali and to the
early Caliphs of >the 7th Century. Indeed. Today, back on out
timeline, Caliph Ibrahim announced his true name ... Abu Bakr
al-Baghdadi al-husseini al-qurashi... and claimed to be a descendant of
The Prophet. Your parsing of the name "Khalid ib'n Hussein" would work
just as well with our own aspiring caliph. Abu Bakr was the first
successor to The Prophet (his father-in-law, first of the "Rightly
Guided" caliphs), and represents the claim to legitimacy, especially
Sunni legitimacy, as Sunnis regard Abu Bakr as the first legitimate
successor while the Shia hold that Ali should have been so nominated.
The name al-Baghdadi could refer to the situs of the great Abbasid
Caliphate, which ruled from Baghdad and which was, in large part, the
last Sunni arab-controlled caliphate (the Fatimids, who followed, were
Isma'ili Shia). The al-husseini refers to the claimed descent from The
Prophet - Hussein was the third son of Ali and also a successor caliph,
and Ali was the cousin and son-in-law of The Prophet and also was the
fourth of the Sunni accorded "Rightly Guided" successors to The Prophet.
Hussein' death at the Battle of Karbala finalized the Sunni-Shia split.
Al-qurashi refers to descent from The Tribe of the Prophet, the
Quraysh. In all, it is a total and complete claim by name to the title
of, and right to be, Caliph. It also clearly puts him in the Sunni side
of the great sectarian rift. Edited 07-07-2014 02:36
|
David "PiperFan" Johnson 07-03-2014
23:31 UT
|
~
David Sooby wrote:
> Not necessarily. The person known as "Khalid
> ib'n Hussein" on Chalmers' timeline could have
> been born on a very great number of timelines
> (theoretically including ours), without ever
> rising to the position of leader of a Caliphate
> on most of those timelines. We don't even
> have to stipulate that Kalid ib'n Hussein was
> his birth name. It could have been a name he
> assumed after a life-altering event, such as
> being inspired by a vision.
Point
taken. Let's recall that "Hussein" (ib'n Ali) was the name of the
Hashemite monarch who proclaimed what historians call the "Sharifian
Caliphate" after the Ottoman Caliphate was abolished. Thus "ib'n
Hussein"--"son of Hussein"--might be a name that was chosen by a
successor of the old Caliph Hussein. And Khalid ib'n Walid, the "Sword
of Allah," was a Companion of the Prophet and commander of the military
forces of the early Caliphates which followed the death of Mohammed.
So, I'm guessing, "Khalid ib'n Hussein" was very much an assumed name
intended to harken back both to Hussein ib'n Ali and to the early
Caliphs of the 7th Century.
But given that in the "actual world"
no leaders in the region were talking about a "Caliphate" when Beam was
writing "Edge of the Knife" in 1956-57, it's very likely that the life
of whomever created the Islamic Caliphate and had a son old enough to be
away at school in Britain when he was assassinated in 1973 was already
very different from that of his "actual world" counterpart by the late
1950s.
Another interesting thing about Khalid ib'n Hussein and
his Islamic Caliphate is that its capital seemed to be at Basra, in
southern Iraq. Basra is in the Shia-dominated south of Iraq and the Shia
generally rejected the idea of a Caliphate (which came to be understood
to be a Sunni institution). It may be that Khalid put his capital in
Basra as a concession to the Iraqi (and other) Shias, of course, but at
the end of the day there simply isn't enough information in the yarns
for us to know. Whether or not Beam understood this conundrum is
uncertain. (He never mentions the Sunni and Shia branches of Islam.)
YMMV,
David
--
"Good things in the long run are often tough while they're happening." - Otto Harkaman (H. Beam Piper), ~Space Viking~
~
|
|
David Sooby
07-03-2014
22:24 UT
|
On 7/2/2014 9:43 PM, QT - David PiperFan Johnson wrote:
> --QT-------------------------------------------------------------
> Reply by email or visit
> http://www.quicktopic.com/42/H/tnfVKeAH3s4T/m1055
> ------------------------------------------------------------- ---
>
> Even for someone like me, who believes that the Terro-human
> Future History and Paratime settings are distinct and separate,
> it's still possible to consider the Terro-human Future History
> setting an "alternate history," especially today, half a century
> after Beam was writing the yarns.
>
> The "actual world" clearly diverged from Beam's understanding of
> the Terro-human Future History but the interesting thing is that
> this happens much earlier than the late 1950s when Beam realized
> this himself. For example, someone like Khalid ibn Hussein must
> have been born _before_ the time when, say, Edward Chalmers was
> running afoul of his university administration--and the Central
> Intelligence Agency--and foreseeing Khalid in his own "future,"
> which means that the actual divergence point must have come no
> later than sometime early in the 20th Century (or First Century,
> Pre-Atomic)--in other words, well before the time in which _any_
> of the earliest Terro-human Future History yarns are set (or
> when Beam was writing them).
Not
necessarily. The person known as "Khalid ib'n Hussein" on Chalmers'
timeline could have been born on a very great number of timelines
(theoretically including ours), without ever rising to the position of
leader of a Caliphate on most of those timelines. We don't even have to
stipulate that Kalid ib'n Hussein was his birth name. It could have
been a name he assumed after a life-altering event, such as being
inspired by a vision.
Now, that's not to say that your larger
point isn't correct, David. Quite possibly the divergence point was
earlier than Piper ever
realized. I just don't agree that the divergence point must have been when any single person was born.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Clear ether!
David "Lensman" Sooby
|
David "PiperFan" Johnson 07-03-2014
03:43 UT
|
~
David Sooby wrote:
> But just because the current attempt to found a new
> Caliphate doesn't match what Professor Chalmers saw,
> doesn't mean that his vision (perception?) of a future
> isn't occurring on -some- timeline, perhaps onr not
> too terribly distant crosstime from our own.
Even
for someone like me, who believes that the Terro-human Future History
and Paratime settings are distinct and separate, it's still possible to
consider the Terro-human Future History setting an "alternate history,"
especially today, half a century after Beam was writing the yarns.
The
"actual world" clearly diverged from Beam's understanding of the
Terro-human Future History but the interesting thing is that this
happens much earlier than the late 1950s when Beam realized this
himself. For example, someone like Khalid ibn Hussein must have been
born _before_ the time when, say, Edward Chalmers was running afoul of
his university administration--and the Central Intelligence Agency--and
foreseeing Khalid in his own "future," which means that the actual
divergence point must have come no later than sometime early in the 20th
Century (or First Century, Pre-Atomic)--in other words, well before the
time in which _any_ of the earliest Terro-human Future History yarns
are set (or when Beam was writing them).
Be well,
David
--
"I
remember, when I was just a kid, about a hundred and fifty years ago--a
hundred and thirty-nine, to be exact--I picked up a fellow on the
Fourth Level, just about where you're operating, and dragged him a
couple of hundred parayears. I went back to find him and return him to
his own time-line, but before I could locate him, he'd been arrested by
the local authorities as a suspicious character, and got himself shot
trying to escape. I felt badly about that. . . ." - Tortha Karf, "Police
Operation"
~
|
David "PiperFan" Johnson 07-03-2014
03:31 UT
|
~
Tom Rogers wrote:
> Piper
> clearly understood, from an historical perspective at least, the
> deep-seated attraction and desire of many people in that part of
> the world for such a political arrangement. I just find it
> extremely interesting to see a variant of it actually attempting
> to become reality at this time.
I
think this speaks to the depth of Beam's understanding of the history
of the region and his grasp of the deep-seated political, economic, and
social (including religious) dynamics at play. In this regard, "Edge of
the Knife" is a fascinating yarn. There is so much geopolitical stuff
going on in this region in that story (like the way that Beam means a
portion of Iran when he mentions "an Eastern-inspired uprising in
Azerbaijan") in the run up to the Thirty Days' War and the formation of
the (first) Terran Federation.
Be well,
David
--
"You
either went on to the inevitable catastrophe, or you realized, in time,
that nuclear armament and nationalism cannot exist together on the same
planet, and it is easier to banish a habit of thought than a piece of
knowledge." - H. Beam Piper, ~Uller Uprising~
~
|
|
Tom Rogers
07-03-2014
01:24 UT
|
On 7/2/14 David Sooby wrote:
> Thanks to both of you for a fascinating summary of what is (and isn't!) going on over there!
>But
just because the current attempt to found a new Caliphate doesn't match
what Professor Chalmers saw, doesn't mean that his vision
>(perception?) of a future isn't occurring on -some- timeline, perhaps onr not too terribly distant crosstime from our own.
Hiya Lensman!
All thanks to David for his usual sterling analysis of the historical underpinnings of Beam's works.
My
two shekels are simply the ramblings of one who has a keen interest in
the mytho-religious aspects of what often passes for current events/
history. There are so many layers to what appears to be gonig on in the
greater Levant right now. I almost feel dirty watching the events unfold
given the real level of human misery being doled out.
Tom
|
|
David Sooby
07-02-2014
05:59 UT
|
On 7/1/2014 7:46 PM, QT - Tom Rogers wrote:
> Hey David,
>
> Nice post and summary of Beam's version of the Caliphate. I
> absolutely agree with your assesment of the situation and doubt
> that whatever is taking shape in Iraq/Syria in our timeline [ ;
> ) ] will even remotely resemble Piper's vision.
Thanks to both of you for a fascinating summary of what is (and isn't!) going on over there!
But
just because the current attempt to found a new Caliphate doesn't
match what Professor Chalmers saw, doesn't mean that his vision
(perception?) of a future isn't occurring on -some- timeline, perhaps onr not too terribly distant crosstime from our own.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Clear ether!
Lensman
(aka David Sooby)
|
|
Tom Rogers
07-02-2014
01:46 UT
|
Hey David,
Nice post and summary of Beam's version of the
Caliphate. I absolutely agree with your assesment of the situation and
doubt that whatever is taking shape in Iraq/Syria in our timeline [ ; ) ]
will even remotely resemble Piper's vision.
Many years ago on
the Piper-l list I mentioned that the creation of a caliphate was the
goal of the insurgencies (read: al quaeda) then active in the region; I
remember you asking me , in response to my assertion, for
clarification. I don't remember clarifying anything, but my then-point
was that the resurrection of some kind of unified islamic
politico-religious state has been a long held dream in many circles and
that said dream was very much alive. Recent developments in our timeline
indicate that the dream has found a new proponent in the ISIL or DAISH.
From a current events standpoint, this is big news. From a humanitarian
standpoint, the sectarian strife is horrific and immensely troubling.
From a geopolitical and historical standpoint, it is utterly fascinating
and disquieting. Piper clearly understood, from an historical
perspective at least, the deep-seated attraction and desire of many
people in that part of the world for such a political arrangement. I
just find it extremely interesting to see a variant of it actually
attempting to become reality at this time.
One last thought - it
of worth to note that last real caliphate (that of the Ottomans;
Faisal's was but a pipe-dream) was abolished by Ataturk in the creation
of the modren Turkish state. This has never sat well with the Arab world
for at least two reasons: first, true caliphs should come from the
family or tribe of The Prophet (which the Ottomans were not), and,
secondly, the assumption of the caliphic role by Turks or any non-arabs
at any time will never sit well with the faithful of arabic descent. To
believers in the caliphic system, for such non-arabs to first "usurp"
the caliphic role and then to "abolish" it is a two-fold blasphemy. What
I hear coming out of the pronouncements of ISIL very much carries the
echoes of these old grievances.
Personally, I'd prefer Piper's version.
Tom
|
|
|
New Topic
My Topics
Views:
35310
(Unique:
9358
) / Subscribers:
27 | What's this?