How To Build An Empire (And Why It's Probably A Monarchy) | Worldbuilding

Episode 26: Government, Federations, and Empires

In this video we discuss worldbuilding governments, how and why different types are established, and how a state expands to form an empire.

---

---

[thegrandwombat]

I'm sad to learn that a Timocracy is not a system in which Tim is in charge

[Xalerdane]

You used the modern definition of ‘tyranny’.

During the Bronze Age and Iron Age, Tyrannies were a rather common form of government. The closest modern equivalent, at least in structure, is a dictatorship. While it was rule by a single individual like a monarchy, the Tyrant did not legitimize his rule through claims of divine appointment or descent from a previous ruler. Instead, he either seized it using an army loyal to himself, or convinced the people of the city-state that granting him complete authority over them would help them more than it would hurt them. Since the difference in power between the Tyrant and the people was not as great as it can be today, the Tyrant couldn’t fail to protect and provide for his subjects too much or they and/or the soldiers under his command would off him and replace him with a new Tyrant.

[slvaltva]

While it's not common for nomadic societies to quickly evolve into settled ones, it's not too uncommon for them to conquer and take over their settled neighbors and become a part of this settled culture as a new elite. So if one wants to write about a nomadic society changing, it's worth looking into such examples.

[damonhawkes]

History nerd here, just an interesting anecdote: you said democracy usually emerges from other government types, the Celtic and Germanic peoples are an interesting exception to this. There was of course no "standard" political structure in these broad cultural groups, but democratically elected chieftains or councils seem to have been common in these societies, at least during the time of the early roman empire. It is possible that hunter-gatherer tribes that begin settling down do often form democratic (or democratic-adjacent) political structures as a direct evolution of their more loose egalitarian organization. We don't really know of course because this transition almost always happens before writing has been adopted by a society.

Anyway it's an interesting thought, as it seems the more democratic tribes in Gaul and Germania slowly became less democratic as temporarily elected warlords started using their prestige and wealth to hold on to power permanently, thus reshaping their society into a Chiefdom. So in that case you do see proto-democracy first, which then morphs into autocracy.

[thebighurt]

CGP Grey did a video on why Monarchies exist. They have a consistent chain of change of power, which makes them far more stable than a government type where a new ruler has to be chosen when the last one dies or just loses an election. Granted, that falls apart when the reigning monarch dies "Without Issue." Nothing ever works perfectly as intended.

[Egeslean]

I came across your '7 metals of fantasy' video earlier today and I binged the entire playlist. I'm invested now.

[KevinWarburton-tviy]

You forgot about Confederacy ...a looser form of Federation often found in stateless Tribal/Inter-Tribal Alliances but also possible in a State Society.

[andresmarrero]

I have noticed that ancient governments are rarely just monarchies and usually involve some version of a council which can be anything from a form of democracy to aristocracy. This is because monarchies tend to be rather unstable with people fighting over the chair. More often than not monarchies tend to end up with subpar rulers. It is also impossible for the ruler to be on the ball of everything and so the advice and cooperation of the council is greatly needed and appreciated.

Of course the octopi would be on the ball regarding government structures however the forced in trait of parasitism dooms them to fall. They don't have a way to enforce compliance and by taking over people's bodies and viewing others as lesser makes them as an innate threat to every other race and guarantees rebellion that they would be unable to suppress once it gets started. This is why being parasites, dispite having no need to push them into parasitism in the first place, is a death sentence. It makes you everyone's enemy especially if it is used for anything other than death sentences or capital punishment. Without the hosts there isn't much they can do.

[delmerputnam]

IDK how I'd send if but if you ever need artwork, I'd be open to contribute! Seriously, this is awesome

[realkekz]

Interesting thing to note also is that the state, settled living, and agriculture are almost always spread by conquest, very seldom does a stateless society choose to become settled, either the environment forces them to, or their neighbors do.

[Woodledude]

I'm honestly super excited about the Naquil - I mean, just the idea of a civilization whose main strength is an ability to use other sapient species for their own purposes? There's so many layers to that. Granted it's sort of built on a combination of slavery and necromancy, but I mean like... Fictionally speaking, that's pretty neat anyway.

Like, are there various subcultures that prioritize different species of host, perhaps? Could there eventually be social castes based on what species your host is, or how healthy they are? What would happen to the culture if they discovered a way to preserve hosts that aren't actively used/infested, for later re-use? If the Naquil aren't as long-lived as a particular host species, could a host be inherited?

So many weird, freaky possibilities. Love it.

[petersmythe]

Re democracy - totalitarianism scale?
I would argue this misses several important factors.
1. Institutional strength. Some states have very strict norms or laws enforced very effectively. Western countries are examples. Petty corruption, for example, is almost non-existent in such societies whether democratic or not.
2. Scope of government. Not every state performs the same functions. A neoliberal state might have a scope which includes military spending, national security, state security, public safety, tax collection, environmental protection, the court system, private property rights, and enforcement of financial transparency laws. Meanwhile, embedded liberalism or social democracy might well add to that list, regulation and guidance of the market and providing a certain minimum of living standards. A socialist state might add management of the entire economy, deciding what to produce and where it should go, and intensely regulating any markets or private property that exist. A warlord state doesn't care about most of that stuff, just how to get money flowing to their second rate military, and might even raid its own population for cash without providing public services. Keep in mind it is likely that even in a democracy, dictatorial or pay-to-play organizations fill everything not in the state scope.

3. Conscious ideology. Almost every state is ideological. However, in some states, ideology is used as the justification for the government's right to rule.

[lunaris]

Well, the claim that settled society inevitable/automatically develop states is absolutely wrong and I've actually never seen it in any modern, serious academic anthropological text.
(lel, there even was an industrial stateless society in Ukraine 100 years ago :'D) And considering Ukraine, the Cucuteni-Trypillia culture in the neolithic/chalcolithic had settlements as large as 30-40k inhabitants without any sign of a state (or even some formalised hierarchy)
In fact, most neolithic settled societies seemed to be stateless for 5-7.000 years, with the state only evolving in the bronze age, and as an endogenous factor evolved in only a small fraction of areas with neolithic technology.

[worldforger]

It's a good day whenever WC uploads! I really like how you manage to progress the history of the world by implementing the stuff covered in the rest of the video, it's all seamless.

[ApexPredator]

I thought that Aristocracy had the definition you gave to Oligarchy, and the merit-based rulership was Meritocracy.
With Oligarchy being rulership under a council of rulers?

[iris_drawssandwiches]

I am gonna use for my Minecraft world. I'll update when I am done building the first 3

[craigsurette]

An excellent counter example of a rather large Empire which was not a Monarchy, would be the Iroquois Confederacy.

[SurinamElephant]

The ending really brought it all together! Great video

[kristinebannerman]

Have only just found your channel recently. Love to hear an Australian voice among all the others! Thia whole series gives me wonderful ideas and food for thought when it comes to building worlds for my writing. Keep up the great work!

[BreadBox.]

Very awesome and helpful. I am LOVING your pronunciations of the various species and races in your setting. Those rolled Rs are something else! 😆