The “New Roman Empire”

(Update: After considering the comments that came to this post, and “having a Better Idea,” the culture described in this post will no longer be used under this name; see the replacement post. This post remains for historical interest, but is no longer accurate.)

The New Roman Empire is a political entity in the Shine Cycle. Its name is something of a misnomer, since it’s not really either Roman or an empire, but the name stuck.

Sometime in the 1600s or so, several groups of English Puritans (and, to a lesser extent, other Dissenters) stumbled through a portal and found themselves in a whole new world—on a planet far above the world with which the Shine Cycle is mostly concerned. For some reason, when they came to the realization that they were no longer on Earth, they named the planet New Rome. (Or perhaps the crew of the first spacecraft to visit the planet named it that.)

New Rome is both agriculturally fertile and (in places) very rich in minerals, so their population grew to every corner of the whole planet. And between the “Puritan work ethic,” a strong interest in science among some segments of the population, and the somewhat reduced gravity of the planet, they were making their first essays into space travel in only a few centuries.

The solar system in which New Rome circles has a couple of other habitable (if not quite as hospitable) planets (including moons of its gas giants), so once space travel was reasonably safe enterprising individuals and families set out to colonize those as well.

Eventually, with some scientific breakthroughs that (in the projection of our world’s future history that I’m using for the Shine Cycle) we won’t discover for more than four more centuries, they explored nearby star systems and sent colonists there too.

Politically, the “New Roman Empire” is in fact a commonwealth, not an empire at all. Each of the worlds has its own government, mostly very similar to that of the Plymouth Colony or Calvin’s Geneva, but some drawing greatest inspiration from the Roman Republic. When they encountered—or were encountered by—inhabitants of the flat world far below (from the Shine and Wild Empire, probably) or of worlds around other stars in its sky, a conclave of the governments’ leaders was established to determine such things as foreign policy and common defense—by consensus when possible.

As you might expect from such a loose commonwealth, each world has its own emphases for trade. New Rome exports food, but is also the technological and political leader, for example. There is a vibrant trade between them, and with their closest neighbors. When the spider-ship network reaches them, it enables them to develop ties with much more distant partners.

Because the “foreign policy” of the commonwealth is primarily determined by consensus, there is a strong tilt toward political and military isolation: not getting involved in conflicts unless the New Roman worlds (or their most immediate neighbors and closest trading partners) are attacked. But when war becomes necessary, each world has a large, well-equipped, and very well-trained militia, merchant marine, and planetary- and system-defense corps that make having a sizable standing military unnecessary.

Any thoughts?


4 thoughts on “The “New Roman Empire”

  1. Considering they are Puritans the VERY last thing they would EVER do is call someplace Rome — I mean, they hate Catholics…. And yeah, wow. Umm, this doesn’t make sense…


    • There’s a lot more to “Rome” than the Roman Catholic Church; after a few centuries of isolation from that conflict (since portals are one-way and temporary), the Rome of antiquity or of the early Church would be a stronger referent than the Pope. Perhaps the capital city was built on seven hills. In any case, I also deliberately left open the possibility that the inhabitants weren’t the ones to name it—if an exploration ship from elsewhere found them before their first interplanetary colony, there are any number of possible reasons (from geography to government to the legion-like yeoman militias) its crew might coin the name. And unsuitable names tend to stick.

      And it’s entirely possible that when the time comes to write about these people I’ll decide that a change of name is warranted, or that I’ll come up with a different backstory that fits the parameters better.


      • Haha, yes I certainly know, I’m a historian of Roman and Medieval Europe…. There was very little “early Church in Rome” not controlled by Popes (which are the tentacles of Satan according to most Protestants of the day) — “Early Church” in Protestant rhetoric generally applies to the East” ;) I think it would be the very last name Puritans would ever conjure — clearly you are employing it for other cool name oriented reasons… But yes, a serious stretch but it depends on how to frame it I guess.

        Regardless, I wish you the best of luck in writing!


        • When I speak of “Rome of the early Church” I’m actually thinking of the first century—the church which to which Paul wrote.

          Actually, the name came first (probably on the order of two decades ago), then (years and years ago) the notion that it was founded by “British dissidents.” But when I started preparing this post, since the few appearances of “the New Roman Empire” in my outline are unhesitatingly on the side of the Shine and Wild Empire, my choice of historical groups matching that description were fairly limited.

          And all this is, in any case, backstory that’s not likely to ever come directly to the forefront.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.