Forums

Zamorakianism Explored

Quick find code: 341-342-826-65800655

of 3
AttilaSquare

AttilaSquare

Posts: 1,711Mithril Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
I like this thread. I've been meaning to comment on it for weeks.

First, there's a thesis here worth making explicit. In medieval Europe, military and civic affairs fell under the governance of the state, while moral and religious affairs fell under the governance of the church. You are proposing that the Zarosian empire differed: that civic, moral, and religious affairs fell under the church and Azzanadra, and that military affairs alone remained for the secular branch of government and Zamorak. This is neat.

Second, you propose that there was a greater sense of freedom in the military, as opposed to civilian life. I could certainly believe this if by freedom we mean social mobility or opportunity for advancement. That's been the case in many real world societies. But there is another sense in which the military lacks the freedom of civilian life, because a certain kind of obedience is necessary in military affairs. I would love to see more discussion of what freedom means and how the Zarosian church's teaching on self-control perhaps undermined the idea of freedom proper to civilian life.

There's a lot of potential here for developing the culture of the Zarosian empire, as well as the roots of Zamorakianism. I'm excited to see where it goes.

06-Jul-2016 21:25:28

Sepulchre
Feb Gold Premier Club Member 2019

Sepulchre

Posts: 3,505Adamant Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
AttilaSquare said:
I like this thread. I've been meaning to comment on it for weeks.

First, there's a thesis here worth making explicit. In medieval Europe, military and civic affairs fell under the governance of the state, while moral and religious affairs fell under the governance of the church. You are proposing that the Zarosian empire differed: that civic, moral, and religious affairs fell under the church and Azzanadra, and that military affairs alone remained for the secular branch of government and Zamorak. This is neat.

Second, you propose that there was a greater sense of freedom in the military, as opposed to civilian life. I could certainly believe this if by freedom we mean social mobility or opportunity for advancement. That's been the case in many real world societies. But there is another sense in which the military lacks the freedom of civilian life, because a certain kind of obedience is necessary in military affairs. I would love to see more discussion of what freedom means and how the Zarosian church's teaching on self-control perhaps undermined the idea of freedom proper to civilian life.

There's a lot of potential here for developing the culture of the Zarosian empire, as well as the roots of Zamorakianism. I'm excited to see where it goes.
Zamorakian beliefs and systems are based heavily in the way of the Zarosian Empire. The main difference is that where Zaros now believes that all beings should be uplifted to their full potential and subtly guided, Zamorak would probably enforce a stricter system of rule by those he deems "worthy."
A
World Guardian
must learn to find
Balance
in themselves.
Only then can they
Control
themselves and forge their own
Fate.

07-Jul-2016 06:05:46

Svigris

Svigris

Posts: 806Gold Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
I think I would argue the exact opposite. We see with things like the Nihil and Char that Zaros has very little regard for individual life instead choosing to create his own from others or taking favorites. Zamorak on the other hand is willing to try to uplift as many as he can he doesn't help those who oppose him but he'd help anyone who proved that that they do intend to follow his philosophy.

Zaros has alway missed the "human" (term used not to only describe humans) which Zamorak seems to "get" much better.

07-Jul-2016 18:39:52

Maiden China

Maiden China

Posts: 5,142Rune Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Svigris said:
I think I would argue the exact opposite. We see with things like the Nihil and Char that Zaros has very little regard for individual life instead choosing to create his own from others or taking favorites. Zamorak on the other hand is willing to try to uplift as many as he can he doesn't help those who oppose him but he'd help anyone who proved that that they do intend to follow his philosophy.

Zaros has alway missed the "human" (term used not to only describe humans) which Zamorak seems to "get" much better.
waitwhat? zaros loves char, I mean, yes, he loves seren more but still
Carn

08-Jul-2016 00:48:57

Svigris

Svigris

Posts: 806Gold Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Maiden China said:
Svigris said:
I think I would argue the exact opposite. We see with things like the Nihil and Char that Zaros has very little regard for individual life instead choosing to create his own from others or taking favorites. Zamorak on the other hand is willing to try to uplift as many as he can he doesn't help those who oppose him but he'd help anyone who proved that that they do intend to follow his philosophy.

Zaros has alway missed the "human" (term used not to only describe humans) which Zamorak seems to "get" much better.
waitwhat? zaros loves char, I mean, yes, he loves seren more but still


That's exactly my point. Zaros sacrificed an entire civilization to empower one. Zaros sees individual as nothing more than tools for himself and those he chooses. Zamorak on the other hand individuals as just that. An individual is worth only what they themselves prove to be worth, are you worth the death of millions? Zamorak would say no to most, key word being most. Zamorak's focus seems to more be trying to find the diamonds in the rough and cutting those he finds. While Zaros seems to like to make diamonds out of raw coal a far more intensive process.

08-Jul-2016 16:33:33

Hazeel

Hazeel

Posts: 6,720Rune Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
It seemed like the opposite to me. Zamorak seems more interested in an all-ecompassing chaos where people survive, adapt, or die. Zaros seems far more passive about it, he talks about working with specific individuals, and only trying to encourage people to seek strength, allowing them to make the active choice on their own. Runescape doesn't need a hero...it needs a villain. An all encompassing force of evil that will remain ever-threatening and use chaos to make the peoples of Gielinor tolerate each other, grow strong together, and fight side by side against this evil. I am that villain.

08-Jul-2016 19:28:24

Svigris

Svigris

Posts: 806Gold Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Hazeel said:
It seemed like the opposite to me. Zamorak seems more interested in an all-ecompassing chaos where people survive, adapt, or die. Zaros seems far more passive about it, he talks about working with specific individuals, and only trying to encourage people to seek strength, allowing them to make the active choice on their own.


I think we are agreeing here. Zamorak tends to try to apply his approach to as many as he can and reaps the results of it. While Zaros tries for much more controlled results at greater expenses.

08-Jul-2016 19:47:38

Lord Pyro I
Nov Member 2018

Lord Pyro I

Posts: 3,984Adamant Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Svigris said:
Hazeel said:
It seemed like the opposite to me. Zamorak seems more interested in an all-ecompassing chaos where people survive, adapt, or die. Zaros seems far more passive about it, he talks about working with specific individuals, and only trying to encourage people to seek strength, allowing them to make the active choice on their own.


I think we are agreeing here. Zamorak tends to try to apply his approach to as many as he can and reaps the results of it. While Zaros tries for much more controlled results at greater expenses.


To me the main difference between the two, is that nowhere in Zamorak's philosophy does he claim he is needed to raise others up. Zamorak just helps where he can like any mortal might and supports self improvement and growth. Zaros's philosophy suggests he personally is the inspiration for growth and required to help individuals he chooses to raise up. Zamorak would never claim to have the authority to decide who gets "chosen" which is why he approaches more people (i.e. he's not picking people just helping anyone who shows promise).
"The greatest endeavors are achieved because of their selfless intent"
#WarIsComing

09-Jul-2016 00:04:44

Raleirosen
Jun Member 2019

Raleirosen

Posts: 5,069Rune Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Lord Pyro I said:
To me the main difference between the two, is that nowhere in Zamorak's philosophy does he claim he is needed to raise others up. Zamorak just helps where he can like any mortal might and supports self improvement and growth. Zaros's philosophy suggests he personally is the inspiration for growth and required to help individuals he chooses to raise up. Zamorak would never claim to have the authority to decide who gets "chosen" which is why he approaches more people (i.e. he's not picking people just helping anyone who shows promise).

I don't recall anything that ever suggested Zaros held himself up as the inspirational poster child for his supposed ideology.
Patrolling Lore FC almost makes you wish for a Great Revision.

09-Jul-2016 01:38:16

NotFishing

NotFishing

Posts: 16,729Opal Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Raleirosen said:
Lord Pyro I said:
To me the main difference between the two, is that nowhere in Zamorak's philosophy does he claim he is needed to raise others up. Zamorak just helps where he can like any mortal might and supports self improvement and growth. Zaros's philosophy suggests he personally is the inspiration for growth and required to help individuals he chooses to raise up. Zamorak would never claim to have the authority to decide who gets "chosen" which is why he approaches more people (i.e. he's not picking people just helping anyone who shows promise).

I don't recall anything that ever suggested Zaros held himself up as the inspirational poster child for his supposed ideology.


Yeah... he doesn't even want people to know he exists.

But I think what Pyro was really saying was that Zaros believes he and he alone is fit to guide and improve mortals.

Both want self-improvement. Zamorak thinks it should come by throwing people into the face of adversity and have them compete amongst each other, hopefully emerging stronger from the experience. This makes sense given his Mahjarret background, where they were constantly at war, fighting for dominance, and sacrificing their weak links to make everyone stronger.

Meanwhile, Zaros thinks it is both his responsibility and birthright to subtly nudge people towards what he believes is the solution. And Zaros believes himself to be the best person for the job, since he is one of the oldest beings in existence, has visited and learned from countless civilizations, and his shown himself to be one of the wiser gods. I personally do not consider Zamorak wise, but that's just me.
Beneath the gold, the Bitter Steel.

09-Jul-2016 03:03:08 - Last edited on 09-Jul-2016 03:32:29 by NotFishing

Quick find code: 341-342-826-65800655Back to Top