This thread will probably be pretty short and some might see it as useless, but I always found my favorite part of the entirety of the late TES trilogy (3, 4, and 5) was how very Roman everything was. Being a huge fan of Ancient Rome I've always loved how Bethesda strived to create this sort of Ancient Roman world, throwing together a lot of overdone fantasy tropes and giving them their very own Roman fantasy twist. I can see a lot of parallels in Skyrim, even, to the barbarian invasion crisis of the late western-Roman Empire and even the rise of Christianity stomping out false Gods (like the whole thing with Talos). I always get really excited about the Elder Scrolls because when I'm not playing Imperium Romanum MB:Warband mod or Rome: Total War I can come to Skyrim or Morrowind, dress up as a Roman legionary and RP in my head a very Roman-like existence. You've got a senate-like Governing body as well as an Emperor, and there was also once slavery. That's also why Oblivion was my least favorite of these last three games, was because it deviated drastically from the Roman-esque atmosphere for no real, logical reason. Considering Oblivion only takes place a few years from Morrowind, there's no reason why everything should have changed drastically.

Anyway, I was wondering if anyone else enjoyed this. I've never played Daggerfall, but I was also wondering if Daggerfall held a similar tone and experience to it? I truly hope TES sticks to this fantasy style and doesn't deviate as much as Oblivion did in the future. It's one of the big factors that makes the Elder Scrolls universe as a whole very, very unique. How many games use Ancient Rome and the classical period as a whole as a framework for an entirely new, unique fantasy world? I don't just mean mythological games like God of War or movies like 300 or the Immortals, I mean making an entirely new universe and instead of basing it off of the contrived and overly used medieval fantasy setting, you base it off of Ancient Rome and throw in all sorts of creepy and exotic races, creatures, and environments and make a world that feels very much alive, and very much new and unusual.

No other fantasy game really gives me that feel, and I would bet that it's the inspiration of Ancient Rome for the Imperials that really gives it that flair. Who would agree?

I am very fascinated by those things myself.

I really enjoy as low fantasy as possible and TES really caters to that. And I hope the series wil continue on that track (not necessarily at the cost of high-fantasy for thos who want that).

To answer your question about Daggerfall...
Well yes and no. First No, because its set in the northwestern part of Tamriel, and from what I remember there were hardly any Imperials there or Imperial strongholds like we see in Morrowind and later.
Also each Kingdom/City had their own guards.

Then kinda Yes because: Daggerfall catered to low fantasy like no other title. The there was a abundance of weapons (melee and ranged),materials and classes.
And the balance of factions and balance between them was fantastic.
Also the system where you really had to work for their trust, and regain their trust.
I dont think I ever had a more epic feeling in a game.
Very few can say they finished that game because it was so huge.

Id really like to see TES go back to some of the faction ideas that was so great in Daggerfall and blend it with Rome series drama and intrigue.
Id also like to see more changes in the world as you help shift the balance of power.

Id also like to be able to finish all quests (except the mage guild ones ofc) by using low fantasy. Im not all for having to join the Circle in order to reach the top in Companions guild, or the daedra stuff in order to become thane.

I love the Roman/Imperial connection that seems obviously implied by Bethesda. I think you were able to see more of it in Morrowind and Skyrim, rather than Oblivion though. In Oblivion, the Imperials seemed more like a high middle ages Holy Roman Empire (Germany) with mainly later medieval inspired armor and weapon designs (but a Greek looking helmet for Imperial City guards). It must have been the way their armor and cities looked, but Oblivion did not look too Roman-esque outside of knowing that the Imperials are supposed to be like them. I think Morrowind pulled that off better, but Skyrim did the best job of it. When it comes to The Elder Scrolls series, I believe Imperials are at their best representation when they look similar to the Romans in their weapons and armor. They even have a tradition of maintaining an arena like the Colosseum. I wish even more could have been done to further draw that connection, but it seems most fans take them as the "Roman race" anyway.

I also love Roman history, and i am a fan of Rome-Total War, the best strategy game i have ever play.

But in Oblivion, i think Imperial is the mixture of Rome, Byzantium and Ottoman Turk. Not really 100% Roman. "Imperial race" look like Middle Eastern in my view unless my eyes is wrong, but Emperor Uriel Septim look like generic British King.

The Blades is the mixture of Knight Templar and Japanese Samurai in which i found it funny.

Yeah, I'm into Roman history, and I too am a big fan of Rome: Total War. Spent many hours on that one.

Anyway, back when I was playing Morrowind, I was just under the impression that the Blades were more like spies (and not heavily armored warrior types either), not like the samurai and praetorian-like unit they seemed to become in Oblivion. The Blades are still cool though.

Yeah I will just say I love Roman History and hate that the Empire in TES has lost its original identity as it was apparently subsumed into the stereotypical and bastardized idea of Roman Culture. What, may I ask, do you think makes it similar to Rome if I may ask? Personally I think it is all mostly superficial with some pretty drastic differences from the various different cultures of Romes varied History.

lols, me too, first it was my brother, he play Medieval-Total war, at first i just wonder what is he playing, i only saw something moving on a big map, i don't know what is so enjoyable with that, but he spent almost 24 hours playing it (at that time he was jobless and unmarried) Then i give it a try, yeah i got into a trap, it is so addictive lols then when Rome-Total War come out, me and my brother is like being drugged playing it, and we talk about it every time, crazily searching on internet about Rome and its history, watching Rome based historical movies, using Roman nickname to each other such as "Imperator" and "Pontiflex Maximus". We also try Shogun-Total War and also becoming crazy the same like all Total War series. But we don't play the latest of the series (Total War Empire on the others)


In Oblivion, the Blade history look like Templar history. It is a monastic order of military. Have chapter house. Have ranks and degrees. Jauffery is the Grandmaster like Jaques d'Molay. Templar also related with freemasonry and Illuminati today who work behind the scenes of everything, similar like Blades who work behind the scenes. But in Oblivion what make it funny is the Japanese make up Bethesda give them. It is so out of place and mismatch.

I think it's kind of interesting that Bethesda has changed the function of the Blades over time. I don't think much is revealed about them in Daggerfall, where they first appear. But I'd say it's heavily implied that they're an intelligence-gathering organization. In Morrowind, as Archaeologist says, it is explicitly stated that they're an intelligence-gathering organization. And as far as I can tell they also appear to be Imperial in style. In Oblivion their function is that of elite bodyguards. And, as Niza pooints out, their style is now Akaviri. In Skyrim they become Dragonhunters.

I'm not sure how I feel about this. On the one hand I like the idea that concepts can change and grow over time. On the other hand I wonder if anybody at Bethesda is keeping track of the lore.

Maybe the Blades changed over time while still remembering their origins. They started out as the Dragonguard and when the last of the actual Dragonborn(Tiber Septim) were done and only those of the Dragons blood remained(other Septims), then they lost their use as physical bodyguards and became protectors of the Empire by spying and becoming an intelligence gathering organization. This led to their downfall when the Septim line ended and they began their decline. In Skyrim we see them being restored to their roots in some sense so they kind of come full circle. All that time they never forgot their history and origins.

Jauffre explicitly states in Oblivion that their role as a spy network is still very much intact, and that only a few get the honor of serving openly in the Imperial guard.

I just went through every line of Jauffre 's dialog in the CS. Jauffre does not have any dialog stating that the Blades' role as a spy network is intact. In fact he has no dialog connecting the Blades to spying in any way. He does, however, twice refer to the Blades as guards:

"One of the youngest Blades ever to serve in the Emperor's personal guard."
"Many years ago, I served as captain of Uriel's bodyguards, the Blades."

My bad, the line I was thinking of actually comes from Baurus.

"[Jauffre's] the Grandmaster of the Blades. As the eyes and ears of the Emperor, the Blades don't advertise themselves. We of the Imperial Bodyguard are the public face of the Blades, but most of my brothers serve the Emperor quietly, behind the scenes. You'll find Grandmaster Jauffre at Weynon Priory, living as a simple monk."

(Emphasis mine)

Jauffre only implies the real function of the Blades:

"You wonder to find me here? Discretion is our watchword. Only a few of us have the honor to serve publicly in the Imperial Guard."

Hmmm... interesting..
I guess that question was directed to OP, but Im still replying to that.

Yes I guess in many ways its only superficial (like armor, architecture, an latin inspired names).
But there certainly are other deeper things as well like imperialism, structure and being rather sophisticated.
We cant blame Bethesda for not making a blueprint of Rome. Ofc they had add their own flavour/artistic touch to Cyrodil.

But I still agree that there lies much potential in that culture that Bethesda hasnt touched (yet).

For instance one thing that is there is how short quickly the politics (and those in power) shifted and what great impact the poltics had on rich as well as poor.
Maybe Bethesda made it dificult for themselves when the added the voice of the emperor...?
In one way its a great way to seperate the Imperials from the more chaotic and tribal cultures, but I also feel that ties the Imperials to not have poltical conflict or in other ways being oppourtunistic (corrupt) like Rome was.

Also its hard to get why are the the Imperials in TES imperialistic?
For Rome its was to reasons (mongst others probably).
One was the great idea of getting funding for building the great capital and surroundings, another was the need for grain etc to feed its citizens.
Id like to see future games elaborate on that issue. Fighting over limited resources can give exciting gameplay.
Also seeing how you as a player can influence the stream of resources to Cyrodil (if they decide that Imperials send resources there) or cut of resources there (if you play stormcloaks etc) can be really exciting gameworld changes.

Rome's driving motives were formed when it threw off the early Etruscan rulers and became an independent city-state. The defeat of the Etruscan city of Veii, only 12 miles from Rome, required the creation of a professional army out of the volunteer army which it had up to that point. As a well-situated trade city, it was subjected to several attacks (including the Gauls), and eventually took the attitude that everyone was out to invade them. The way to prevent that, obviously, was to invade them first.

Rome didn't so much "conquer" as "absorb" the other cultures around it, taking on parts of that culture while imparting Roman ideas and ideals to those cities. Its armor was inspired by the Samnites, its swords by the Spanish, and its helmets by the Carthaginians, while its religious pantheon included a ponderous host of deities from all of its conquered neighbors and various trade partners. The later Imperial period would have been unrecognizale to an early Republic citizen.

Personally, I find Rome fascinating, and a great "study" as to why modern society, politics, and culture do the things they do. There's something distinctly "modern" about a culture which had "fast food", "welfare", "high-rise apartments", and "NASCAR" (both two and four horsepower versions), along with trade imbalances with India and China, rampant inflation, and peacekeeping forces stationed in Germany and the Middle East.

The TES series borrows heavily from Rome, but also from a host of other cultures, and creates a blend that's "Roman-ish", and yet distinctly NOT Rome. If it were a direct attempt to imitate it outright, I'd probably find it hilariously bad and just ignore it.

It became evident to me a long time ago that no one at Bethesda is. The fans care far more about it then Bethesda does.

To go slightly off topic, do you think if the Roman empire had stuck around (I don't know much about history, I'm not really sure why it fell) that something similar to the industrial revolution and the modern era in general would have occured much earlier? I've heard that the Romans even had sewer systems that were lost after it was gone and not reinvented for something like a thousand years.

One of the problems I believe we have in answering this question is agreeing on a definition of "Roman Empire." If we accept the Eastern Roman Empire (or Byzantine Empire) as a continuation of the Western Roman Empire then the Roman Empire did not end until 1453...and your question has been answered. If our definition of 'Roman Empire' is limited to the Western Roman Empire only then your question stands.

It is my opinion that Europe experienced a 'Dark Ages' (or 'Early Middle Ages', the term I'm more comfortable with) not because of the fall of the Western Roman Empire but because of the rise of Christianity. At that time Christian doctrine was antagonistic to free inquiry (e.g. 'of the Tree of Knowledge thou shalt not eat'). It is my belief that with the spread of early Christianity a decline in intellectual pursuits and the pursuit of science in particular was inevitable.

But we have to wait for the Elder Scrolls forum's resident historian, SubRosa, to give us an intelligent, authoritative answer to your question. She knows much more about this stuff than I do.

What is Rome? This is the hardest question ever for all time. Rome is not the city of Rome, not its people or race either. One can be considered as Roman if following the Roman idea.

Is Rome an idea? it is not totally an idea, it is a belief but not a belief system. Rome is a dream....

German people was consider themselves as Roman in The Holy Roman Empire, although they have nothing to do Rome at all, they are Germanic Teutonic people. Hitler also carry many of Roman identity in WW2 era.

"All roads lead to Rome" by mean, everything we see today, it have something to do with Rome. And "Rome is not build in one day", it is not the city or the country, but the idea, belief and the dream that is not built in one day.

Even in Quran (Islam Holy Book) talk about the Romans (Byzantium), which means Rome and its people give significant impact in world history. prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) prophesied Romans victory over Persians.

I like that the visuals of the Imperial Legion (sans Oblivion) tend to look more of what the public idea of a roman soldier looks like than a standard medieval knight. It's the small things that openly sets it apart from what people view as conventional fantasy. Of course, there's a lot more, but this is usually the first thing people see.

I think of Imperials as Imperials more than anything else, though. I may have been learning about Roman history and culture just as I picked up Morrowind, but the differences are as big as the similarities. Their divine mandate and dragon symbolism is more similar to the ancient Chinese than Roman, and the ancient nedic peoples as outlined in the Song of Pelinal and KotN are more like ancient South American tribes than anything else.

Then, of course, the Mananauts and Battlespire (and all the doors those two ideas open) helps put a much more fantastical spin on the whole idea.

Like Pseron says below, it depends on what you mean by Roman Empire. Rome was around in one shape or form for such a long time, that its society was very different from one phase of history to another. I am assuming you mean the "classic" idea of the Roman Empire at its height in the 1st-2nd Century C.E. During the reigns of Emperors such as Augustus, Tiberius, Claudius, etc...

My thought is actually no. The Roman economy was built upon slavery. It was literally the cornerstone of their entire society. Slavery often inhibits technological advances, because you simply do not need to build machines to do things when you have millions of slaves to do it instead. Add in the fact that slavery was extremely profitable (much like the modern oil industry is), and so the people made wealthy by it opposed any attempts to do away with it. The Romans actually had a steam engine, but it never got used precisely because "What would we do with all the slaves then?"

Slavery and modern, mechanized industry do not mix well. Captains of industry want to be able to hire workers during ecomnomic booms so they can meet demands, and then fire them in the downtimes so they are not wasting money on heads they do not need. They also do not want to be forced to pay for the overhead of food, housing, and clothing. When you buy a slave, you are stuck with that person even when you no long have a use for them, and have all that to deal with. You can try to sell them, but if it is during an economic downturn (which it would have to be if you do not need them anymore), then you are going to lose money in your investment. Slaves are just a lot of overhead that industrialists do not want.

So in order for Rome to truly embrace technological advance, it would have have to do away with slavery. Historically, slavery won out. Because there was simply more money to be made in it by Rome's movers and shakers.


Awww shucks.

Indeed. Scientific inquiry took a back-seat when the Christians took over Rome. For example Geocentricism (the Earth being the center of the universe) was the official Church doctrine, and to suggest otherwise was to risk being branded a heretic, and possibly imprisoned and murdered. For example, things did not work out so well for Hypatia, the last head librarian of Alexandria's Great Library. It was not until the Renaissance that the knowledge of physics, astronomy, and so many other things from Ancient Greece returned to Europe. This was of course thanks in no small part to the Muslims, who resurrected the lost works of the Greek philosophers and added their own discoveries to them.

Yay!

It is indeed not small part...it is a BIG part you know...BIG part from BIG people in a BIG world at that time...and BIG changes to the world after....

Europe at that time have nothing, the Church iron fist rule making Europe ignorance, until Ibn Rushd (Averroes), a Spanish Muslim introduce Rationalism in which open the eyes of European peoples and thus change Europe forever.

See chemistry, where all those "Al" come from? Alchemy, Albumin, Alcohol, Al...Al...Al...it is all originally Arabic.

Algebra is Al Jabar, from Al khwarizmi, from him all those math and physic formula can be made

Ibn Sina (Avicenna), his books are the text book of all surgeons in the world.

just some examples...but USA propaganda win this time

Not to mention the number zero. It sounds insignificant, but it is so hard to imagine that we went for thousands of years not having a 0. Plus the Arabic numeral system, which replaced the old Roman system (that was just a pain in the rear to use).

Also for history recording, socialism, social science...Ibn Khaldun is the father of social science and scientific approach of history recording. Before him, historians are mostly bias and more to a story tellers who love to add things in their records making history myth and legends. Ibn Khaldun is the one who criticize historians works both Middle Eastern and Europeans. He is the one who make theory about rise and fall of civilizations (Cycle Theory). His works become inspiration for European historians, socialists, anthropologist, archeologist ect ect ect. Without him, there is no such thing as modern history.

Roman and Greek historians love to add things in their work, for example, exaggerations regarding races they conquered and exaggerate about themselves. Every conquerors are like that, British also. And today USA. we cannot get a sincere historical records from them.

Rome didn't have a "practical" steam engine, it had a few "steam powered toys". The development into useful machines and engines was only beginning when the culture came apart over a period of a hundred years or so. Water powered equipment was already successfully competing with slave-labor powered machinery (the plates for those Roman banded cuirasses were almost all hammered by water-driven machines), but the culture hadn't been driven to the point of needing to expand steam power any further, until no further development was possible.

Gaius Julius (Caesar) made slaves so cheap because of his Gallic Wars that it nearly destroyed the Roman economy. It also led to enormous social unrest and unemployment, with a military occupation being one of the few alternatives left, and then everyone suddenly had an army and a grudge.....leading to a series of civil wars and the overthrow of the Roman Republic by Ceasar. It took a while before things stabilized and the price of labor once again began to make machinery cost-effective, but it was happening during the later Imperial period. With the fall of Rome and the barbarian rulership essentially replacing the Roman government, slavery gave way to feudalism and serfdom, with slavery finally becoming increasingly obsolete and culturally unacceptable in Europe and America by the mid-1800s (in the Middle East, slavery continued into the late 20th century).

The Islamic countries preserved much of the knowledge of ancient Egypt and Greece (both had previously calculated the diameter of the Earth to within 10% accuracy), as well as making valid contributions of their own, particularly in mathematics, while Europe was plunged into a period of collapse, internal wars, and darkness. Both the East and the West were responsible for the destruction of major libraries for pathetically short-sighted reasons, the restriction of certain knowledge, and other damage due to internal wars and overthrows which took a long time for civilization to recover from, but Europe continued in its darkness for a longer period, and more was lost there.

The Eastern Roman Empire (Byzantium) was both a continuation of Rome in a sense, and a different culture because of its strong Greek ties and population. The Western Roman Empire was conquered by various barbarian groups repeatedly, and the title of Emperor was formally taken by many kings and rulers afterwards, until the Church at Rome eventually became the recognized authority in making the appointment. By that time, the "Roman Empire" had ceased to exist, although Byzantium, as a "semi-Rome" survived for almost another thousand years.

Minor correction, but Herodotus (Greek) is considered to be the founder of "history" in a modern sense. The contributions of various Middle Eastern scientists and writers cannot be denied, although many of them built upon a foundation laid down by Greek/Hellenic writers and philosophers, which was in turn closely linked with less-known Persian counterparts.

In TES, the Empire is not founded on slavery (the Imperials themselves were former slaves of the Aldmer), was never a Republic (despite having an Elder Council with some unspecified functions), and is apparently a blend of several diverse Eastern and Western cultures with varying degrees of Roman-style armor. On the surface, it screams "Rome", but is far from it.

Really enjoy reading your posts as they are indepth and elaborating on the subject (many just write about Rome or other real history without connecting it to TES).

However the following quotes makes me uncertain wether you feel TES borrows from Rome or not....



Would be interesting to hear what people think about borrowing more from Rome or what you think about the way Cyrodil/Imperials have been implemented.

For instance the question I raised earlier about the voice of the emperor being a little obstacle to intriguing storywriting (everybody agreeing to everything, no drama, no personal agendas or hidden agendas, no internal factions etc.), or is voice of the emperor a good thing?