Were The Traitor Primarchs really Man-Children?

[Marshal Rohr]

Which is why they were personalistic absolute monarchies. A clan killing another clan over some sheep is characteristic of feudal/tribal societies without a centralized monopoly of force. Chogoris doesn't particularly fit your criticism because it is based on Mongolia, which established a unique style of state, that still had internecine conflicts.

[Wade Garrett]

Which is why they were personalistic absolute monarchies. A clan killing another clan over some sheep is characteristic of feudal/tribal societies without a centralized monopoly of force. Chogoris doesn't particularly fit your criticism because it is based on Mongolia, which established a unique style of state, that still had internecine conflicts.

A clan/tribal society where the power rests with the family groups is by definition NOT an absolute monarchy. Which is a society where a MONARCH has ABSOLUTE power.

 

Words mean things.

[Conn Eremon]

A monarchy is the rule of a singular individual over all, and is not inherently hereditary or limited, which is why those kinds of monarchies have additional defining terms. At the time in which the Primarchs were still present, they did have that kind of control over their worlds.

 

That is, if I recall my own schooling on the matter correctly.

[Marshal Rohr]

 

Which is why they were personalistic absolute monarchies. A clan killing another clan over some sheep is characteristic of feudal/tribal societies without a centralized monopoly of force. Chogoris doesn't particularly fit your criticism because it is based on Mongolia, which established a unique style of state, that still had internecine conflicts.

A clan/tribal society where the power rests with the family groups is by definition NOT an absolute monarchy. Which is a society where a MONARCH has ABSOLUTE power.

Words mean things.

 

Yes, they do. They have all kinds of meanings. So, by your definition, Brazil is not a true state because there are clans and tribal societies living in the Amazon. Someone should tell the Saud's that they aren't in charge anymore because the Bedouin are still around. While you're at it, you should call the Chinese politburo, Pakistani and Indian Governments, and email the Ayatollah, because the Uyghurs, Pashtos, and Baluchs existence invalidates their sovereignty. Russ and Ferrus both had absolute say over their worlds and peoples. How they exercised it, and whether they allowed conflict to happen doesn't mean that it didn't exist. That's never, ever been how sovereignty is defined. If a tribe or clan could feasibly deny the use of legitimate violence by Ferrus or Russ, you'd have ground to stand on. Since there is no record of Ferrus or Russ ever being challenged to exert legitimate violence over their peoples, you're floating in the wind.

[Wade Garrett]

 

And if those tribes/factions all regularly waged war with one another and the governments you listed, you would have a point. But they don't.

 

In Prospero Burns we see that tribes waging wars of genocide with one another is by no means unheard of. For that matter, they'll happily attack Astartes of the VI Legion if they encounter them outside the Fang.

 

Fenris is not an organised nation state, it's a free for all.

[tdemayo]

I think this sort of discussion about the Primarchs' motives and psychology misses the fundamental nature, the theme and "moral", of the 40k universe. 40k has always rested on a deeply pessimistic view of humanity, which is unable to overcome its own worst instincts, and falls over and over again into ignorant, self-destructive violence. The whole setting, including the Heresy, is about this giant psychomachia between mankind's worst instincts and its sputtering attempts at nobility.

 

So, yes, the Primarchs behave in foolish, childish ways, but their failures of self-discipline and rationality are characteristic of humanity's. They aren't just messed up because of local, "tactical", correctable failures in their upbringing, or their childhood. They are indictators of a fundamental moral weakness in humanity itself.

 

That, I think, is the position at the heart of 40k's background. It is a dark setting, very much an 80s apocalytic dystopia, in which humanity is roiled and driven on by its own inescapable flaws.

[Hesh Kadesh]

Whoo dictionary corner. Can you stop being boring, and get back to the topic? This isn't anything to do with hyperbolic statements over ignorant man children who needa good old 'dry your eyes mate'.

 

In short, Primarchs and the legions have control when present. Due to the nature of the worlds as being ideal breeding grounds for Astartes warriors these worlds were left to stay in their essentially precivilised state. Losing their guiding hand it was only natural for that to happen. Some didn't care, while some believed that their world.should become covilised; Olympia and Nostramo most notably.

[Marshal Rohr]

And if those tribes/factions all regularly waged war with one another and the governments you listed, you would have a point. But they don't.

In Prospero Burns we see that tribes waging wars of genocide with one another is by no means unheard of. For that matter, they'll happily attack Astartes of the VI Legion if they encounter them outside the Fang.

Fenris is not an organised nation state, it's a free for all.

Ferrus and Russ encouraged the conflict. Was Mao any less in charge because he encouraged continuous revolution? Fenris was a state, not a nation state, and state really doesn't even qualify it because it requires territory, but in these cases the territory encompasses the whole world. Only the VI legionaries could qualify as a nation. The Fenrisians were subjects of the Wolf King, that's indisputable. That makes him an absolute monarch. It's even got King in the name.

[tdemayo]

Fenris seems more like a nature preserve or a reservation than a kingdom to me. Most of the population remains deliberately "wild" or "primitive." The much smaller technologically advanced society of the Legion is a monarchy of sorts, but they are more like the game wardens than the rulers of the planet's main population.

 

Obviously, such a setup implies a lot about the way Lemans Russ views humanity, or at least Fenrisians. His legion seems dedicated to a particular "lifestyle" or culture more than anything else, willingly segregated from the larger Imperium.

 

Does this mean he's achieved more or less than Primarchs like Dorn or Guilliman who built empires? It seems to me that Russ believed that for his people, the best life was one of freedom, struggle, conflict, and honor, lived in traditional ways. He secured that for his planet and people, despite having the means to do other wise. He even made a techno-version of it for his legion, which remains as close to a Fenrisian warrior band as possible, while still being a space faring culture.

 

Is he childish? Not having grown from the culture of his birth? Or is he very wise, content in his role and his tradition?

 

 

And if those tribes/factions all regularly waged war with one another and the governments you listed, you would have a point. But they don't.

In Prospero Burns we see that tribes waging wars of genocide with one another is by no means unheard of. For that matter, they'll happily attack Astartes of the VI Legion if they encounter them outside the Fang.

Fenris is not an organised nation state, it's a free for all.

Ferrus and Russ encouraged the conflict. Was Mao any less in charge because he encouraged continuous revolution? Fenris was a state, not a nation state, and state really doesn't even qualify it because it requires territory, but in these cases the territory encompasses the whole world. Only the VI legionaries could qualify as a nation. The Fenrisians were subjects of the Wolf King, that's indisputable. That makes him an absolute monarch. It's even got King in the name.

[tdemayo]

Also, the medievalist in me would point out that there have been many different kinds of kings. Fenris is based on the Germanic migration age and later Viking cultures. In these societies, it is helpful to think of traditional kings as chieftains or warlords, ruling based in a combination of blood legitimacy, religious mantle, personal charisma, and military command of both a personal retinue and the wider tribe. If Leman Russ is the "Wolf King," this is the sort of kingship he modeled over his planet and then his legion.

 

"Absolute" monarchy is used to describe the very different social, beurocratic and legal setup of monarchies like those of Louis the Sun King, and does not seem very helpful as a way of looking at Fenris.

 

Again, to return to the original question, what does the style of society each Primarch encountered or established, reveal about each one's achievements, personality, and level of psychological maturity?

[Marshal Rohr]

If Russ was not an Absolute Monarch that ruled his world through centralized authority, then why didn't the Emperor have to negotiate or conquer the other tribes on Fenris, instead of Russ making the decision for them?

 

And discussing the societies the Primarchs built is not off topic, it's probably the only way to determine their worth at all.

[tdemayo]

I guess it depends on what you mean by "absolute." If you just mean he was indisputably the most powerful man on Fenris, with no real rivals, then yeah. He was absolute. If he showed up at petty chief Wulfgar Wulfnut's hall and gave an order, then Wulfgar would surely follow it. If he called Wulfgar to war, Wulfgar would fight and feel honored. If he demanded tribute, Wulfgar would give it. Hell if he ordered Wulfgar to kill himself, Wulfgar would probably do that too.

 

But historians mean by "Absolute" a particular form of bureauocratic institution. I dont think Leman Russ tried to set planet-wide standard law codes, or collect taxes, or create a public infrastructure, or justice system, or registered blood nobility, or anything like that.

 

Anyway, what do the Emperor and Russ really want from Fenris? Recruits for the legion, and some natural resources. Beyond that, the population can just go on killing each other, barely paying much attention to the semi-mythical Wolf King or Allfather.

 

If Russ was not an Absolute Monarch that ruled his world through centralized authority, then why didn't the Emperor have to negotiate or conquer the other tribes on Fenris, instead of Russ making the decision for them?

 

And discussing the societies the Primarchs built is not off topic, it's probably the only way to determine their worth at all.

[Hesh Kadesh]

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Absolute_monarchy

 

That is what wiki has to say on the matter. For this purpose, Russ is an Absolute Monarch. What he says goes, or else you wnd up on the wrong side dead.

 

Indeed they are often much greater absolute monarchs regarding their homeworld than anything else on that land. They are less monarchs, and more autarchs (as in autocracy) or Kratarchs (as in Kratocracy)

[Marshal Rohr]

I guess it depends on what you mean by "absolute." If you just mean he was indisputably the most powerful man on Fenris, with no real rivals, then yeah. He was absolute. If he showed up at petty chief Wulfgar Wulfnut's hall and gave an order, then Wulfgar would surely follow it. If he called Wulfgar to war, Wulfgar would fight and feel honored. If he demanded tribute, Wulfgar would give it. Hell if he ordered Wulfgar to kill himself, Wulfgar would probably do that too.

 

But historians mean by "Absolute" a particular form of bureauocratic institution. I dont think Leman Russ tried to set planet-wide standard law codes, or collect taxes, or create a public infrastructure, or justice system, or registered blood nobility, or anything like that.

 

Anyway, what do the Emperor and Russ really want from Fenris? Recruits for the legion, and some natural resources. Beyond that, the population can just go on killing each other, barely paying much attention to the semi-mythical Wolf King or Allfather.

 

 

If Russ was not an Absolute Monarch that ruled his world through centralized authority, then why didn't the Emperor have to negotiate or conquer the other tribes on Fenris, instead of Russ making the decision for them?

 

And discussing the societies the Primarchs built is not off topic, it's probably the only way to determine their worth at all.

I see what you're getting at. You're talking about state formation and centralization under a modern bureaucracy. I conceed the point. In that case more apt term would be proto-state for Fenris and Medusa. They have the absolute sovereign, but not the political development of a rule of law.

[tdemayo]

Sure, by that definition, Russ was an "absolute" monarch. (I don't think its a very good or useful one, historically or to really understand how different types of monarchies have or do function, particularly the ancient or medieval ones which are clearly the models for 40k.)

 

But Russ' monarchy was a hell of a lot different than Guilliman's or Dorn's. If we're gonna talk about the Primarchs, I think something is revealef by the governments they built.

 

Guilliman and Dorn (or heck, the Lion or Magnus etc) encouraged their planets' economic development, increased local technology, and built their societies up. They had a vision of progress and development similar to the Emperor's. Russ (Sanguinus?) And others who kept their homeworlds as barbarous recruiting preserves, did not.

 

Is this a sign of maturity? Is it related to their different destinies as loyalist or traitor?

 

I think I might divide the Primarchs into three groups:

 

Let's call one of them the Builders. They tried to develop their homeworld in some way, usually into mini empires, with a goal of improving the organization and technology of their planets. I'd put Guilliman, Dorn, Lorgar, and Magnus into this group.

 

Let's call the second group the Barbarians. They believed strongly in a particular culture and it's philosophy of life, which was at odds with greater Imperial ideas of development and progress. They made their worlds into preserves where that culture could flourish without changing much. I'd put Russ, Khan, and maybe Sanguinus Vulkan and Ferrus Manus into this group.

 

I'd call the third group the Warlords. Once they became Legion commanders, they ceased to give much of a crap about their home planets, aside from being recruiting grounds. Their new obsession lay in certain kinds of warfare. I'd put Horus, Curze, Angron, and maybe the Lion and Fulgrim in this group.

 

So, it seems to me the Builders and the Warlords both had Primarchs who went to Chaos. Only, Chaos being Chaos, Builders like Magnus found their dreams shattered, or, like Lorgar, radically transformed. The Warlords split pretty evenly, since they didn't really have strong opinions about human society anyway. Id say they were the least mature and stable Primarchs, perhaps. Interestingly, the Barbarains, who had a vision of non-standard Imperial socities, were mostly loyalists, and the barbarian enclaves they established are still around 10,000 years later, mostly unchanged.

 

 

 

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Absolute_monarchy

 

That is what wiki has to say on the matter. For this purpose, Russ is an Absolute Monarch. What he says goes, or else you wnd up on the wrong side dead.

 

Indeed they are often much greater absolute monarchs regarding their homeworld than anything else on that land. They are less monarchs, and more autarchs (as in autocracy) or Kratarchs (as in Kratocracy)

[Marshal Rohr]

For some reason, and this may just be a shot in the dark or something I'm misremembering, but Baal lacked resources to actually flourish. Basic things like sustainable Agriculture and potable water sources. Sanguinius led them as best he could, but Baal was just too barren until the Imperium showed up, or something like that.

[Leonite]

Oooh, another point of childishness for Russ! Banning Space Marine psykers, but continuing to use Rune Priests "Because they draw power from Fenris" which everyone knows is bull.

[Wade Garrett]

Technically, that particular bit of foolishness was uttered by the Rune Priest Wyrdmake, not Russ.

 

I liked Aun Helwintr's explanation better, that the difference between a Rune Priest and a Librarian or Sorcerer is one of caution and control. Not the nature of their powers.

[Hesh Kadesh]

Oooh, another point of childishness for Russ! Banning Space Marine psykers, but continuing to use Rune Priests "Because they draw power from Fenris" which everyone knows is bull.

From a meta perspective, yes. In universe, not so much.

 

Does a blind person know what a colour is? If Russ, and the other Psykers in his legion were taught that the colour of red is actually blue, then they believe that red is blue, and when they hear people talking of blue, they picture red. That might be cultured ignorance in conjunction with refusal to listen (to what they see is the lies of those who cavort with daemons from beyond) which leads to their refusal to accept that fact. After all, you're attempting to tell someone that the world they believed flat is actually round.

[Prodigal Son of Magnus]

Oooh, another point of childishness for Russ! Banning Space Marine psykers, but continuing to use Rune Priests "Because they draw power from Fenris" which everyone knows is bull.

that's not really childish though. Hypocritical, but not childish.

[Huggtand]

As Wade Garret points out its not psykers in general Russ among others want to restrict rather the use of psykers without rigorus controll. The main goal was to rein in the thousand sons who many thought had gone to far in their practices.

[daveNYC]

Most of those at Nikea who were speaking against the Thousand Sons were generally against psykers as a group.

 

One thing about the care and feeding of growing primarchs; think back to when you were a child and think about how you felt about your place in the world relative to those who were caring for you.  To a normal child, adults are bigger, stronger, smarter, and in general these semi-magical entities that are able to move through the world in ways that children can barely grasp (at least initially).  Adults know how the world works, while children are ignorant.  Adults can interact as equals with other adults, which is something that children usually cannot do.  Cars, jobs, money, sex, all the stuff that as adults we just deal with on a daily basis, children are introduced to all those gradually, and usually by their parents slowly spoonfeeding them information over the course of years of development.

 

Now imagine a child primarch.  Right off the bat they're stronger, they're probably going to be smarter than 90% of anyone they meet, they have implanted knowledge of language and the sciences (at least from what we can tell from Corax and Perturabo), and they've got insane innate talents that no adult will ever have.  And that's just when they're crawling from their womb-o-matics.  Once out and about in the world, they would learn virtually everything they need instantly.  They'd never have the weaknesses of human children to temper their interactions with the world, they'd never (with the exception of Angron) be in a position of weakness, where they are dependent on others for their survival, and they'd never, ever, be interacting with others who could be considered their equals.

 

They're not really man-childs, because they were never really children to begin with, and yet they're not what we would call men because they've never had to grow from a position of weakness to strength.

[The_son_of_Dorn]

all bought up to believe they were (well because they were) Emperors in their own right, sons of a demi god and given untold power and absoullute command over every resource humanity could spare. Just like giving the Joker access to unlimited Jigsaw like pain mechanisms and resources..........

[Marshal Rohr]

There are examples of child prodigies in reality that don't experience any of that though. A child Primarch may be able to learn speech quickly, but so can some prodigies, they make be stronger than adults, but so are some prodigies. The speed at which they learn has no bearing on what they learn, because morality, ethics, philosophy are not empirical subjects. A Primarch presented with an ethical question may be able to explain the logic of choosing A over B, or pose a viable counter-philosophy, but they can never prove the A is empirically less valid than B, as long as both A and B are valid philosophies.

[Conn Eremon]

all bought up to believe they were (well because they were) Emperors in their own right, sons of a demi god and given untold power and absoullute command over every resource humanity could spare. Just like giving the Joker access to unlimited Jigsaw like pain mechanisms and resources..........

You mean like making him the Right Hand of God, because seriously DC?

 

 

I like Dave's post. Don't fully agree, but it's an interesting one.