Back in early 2008, long-time Berklist alumni and agitator, Mark D Faulkner (aka “Marko Markoko”) sent me a draft of a piece he’d written in response to the “reinterpretation” of House Flambeau presented in Houses of Hermes: Societates that he wished to submit (in a spirit of protest perhaps) to Sub Rosa, then under the helmsmanship of Alex White.
It was a great piece, a real “diamond in the rough”, and a real showcase for Marko’s passion for all things Flambeau and his unbridled and consuming creativity.
I had the opportunity of commenting on some of the early drafts and the privilege of seeing the piece hammered into its final form, tempered into a striking 10-page piece with some great accompanying art. Marko has since gone on to write for the official line, contributing the almogavars to Grogs, the “City of Brass” adventure in Tales of Power and was the initial creative force behind the Val-Negra chapter of the soon-to-be-released Faith and Flame: the Provençal Tribunal.
I’ve managed to convince / cajole / beg / badger Marko into allowing me to repost the article on my blog to coincide with the release of the latest supplement as the first of a series of supplementary posts to support the official Provençal material.
It’s definitely worth checking out here.
Oh, and don’t forget that the remainder of Issue #3 contains articles by later editors Ben MacFarland and Mark Lawford as well as a revised piece on Mythic Zoroastrianism by Alex White that ultimately evolved into the chapter of the same name in the first supplement I worked on, The Cradle and the Crescent…
Very interesting, highly enjoyable.
I do indeed love House Flambeau :mrgreen:
It is also an early example of the Ars Fusion technique I have developed. A long time fan, there are lots of setting pieces I still love using and old ways of things I still prefer. But the mechanics of 5th edition are vastly improved, and there is an extensive amout of newly generated background material that is also awesome. So what I do is take the bits I like from older material, re-imagine them in the new edition, and sand down the wield points so it looks like a seamless original
I like the new background of Flambeau, because really the Spanish thing is not a historicall fact until very after this period, so the retelling about Frank/Carolingian/Visigotic thing is not bad. I like too because under my reading, Apromor could be a Sorgin descendant, my Sorginak interpretations than they are one Gruagrach variation, under my view of watchers over honesty and warders of true (and the Puisssant Perdo was from the Puissant Take on his lineage), but any group and storyteller can change things, the 5ed background is firstly to inspiration.
I respect your opinion, but your history is inaccurate. Original Flambeau was a bit older and his whole life story fit in with the events of the day. As for "after the era". I have no idea what you mean. The Reconquista begins in 722 with the Battle of Covadonga, when Pelayo insures the liberty and independence of Asturias, rebelling against the Moors and becoming king. I figure it could have been one of the early adventures of young Reculed and his mentor Delendos.
I am an expert in medieval Iberian history, mainly because I was inspired by the old Flambeau and that tragically flawed gem of a book (ToH-Iberia). I mean, I really love this stuff :mrgreen:
As for the Basques and the Sorginak, I studied a lot of that as well. The table of contents for Faith & Flame indicates these details will be included therein. I cannot say anything yet, but I hope you enjoy it
See how much I have improved over the years?
Calling Covadonga "the start of reconquista" is quite a stretch really. More like a minor skirmish against a Muslim raid magnified by later chroniclers. And for the record, the "Reconquista" concept is quite out of fashion by some 25-30 years in Iberian historiography now, basically because they were not re-conquering anything, but conquering from the current rulers it for the first time. It tends to be called Christian kingdoms' conquest now
When something is first born, one does not always know where it will end up. Without Pelayo and his victory at Covadonga (with but a handful of men and the alliance of Delendar & Reculed :mrgreen: ); then there would be no Reconquista. From Asturias comes Leon, comes Leone, Castile, and Portugal. Aragon, Navarre and Catalonia were Frankish marches.
The old Flambeau story has Reculed crossing over to join the Franks after the death of Delendar, and it is then that he takes the name (or is given the name) Flambeau. This is where the two versions cross over, both include adventures amongst the Franks.
es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlos_Martel True, i was wrong about the Charles/Carlos, but my point still - after this, there are no Castillian front until the creation, and places like Benicassim born about the mix not violent between Christian and Muslim rules. And again, the Iberian kingdoms grow after Charles Magnus orders, creating the point where the Count of Barcelona bring forth Aragon kingdom (my error was for that sorry).
My point is than the romaniced germanic people were not so different on that period up or botton Pyrinees.
Again, your point of view on your games rules, after all, i insist, the background on 5th edition is inspiration with few 100% canon marks. One virtue and flaw at same time, andvery discussed since the beginning.
Mythic and Romanticized is what Ars Magica is all about
Good point, but at same time; the romantized point of view here on Spain depends a lot from where are you on Spain. To see one good view we need to combine the different Peninsular views: Moorish, Aragonesse, Portuguese, Castillian, Leonese and so on. The romantized on old books and on some general knowledge, it's from the Spanish Castillian; the discussion is near to the round Earth, than it's not because after people telled bad the medieval ideas and stories. The Mythic Europe knows with education than the earth is round, A&A said it.
Again, all depend on the story and message on the game.
This is where I plead for patience with my barbarian Yank ignorance. I have gained an understanding of modern Spanish sectionalism and the different ethnic groups. Asturias/Leon begat Portugal and Castile. Everyone holds a grudge against Castile. Aragon mingled and traded land with Castile, and eventually united with them. They also took a hand in Reconquista, inspired and enabled by Castile.
I am not sure what we are debating. Is it plausibility? It is both plausible and reasonable to me, but the alternatve is also plausible and resonable. So they equate. Is it aesthetics? I cannot force you to see what I see. If you prefer Flambeau to be some anonymous French dandy, that is up to you. I prefer a man who has a name and has iron in his backbone.
I apologize. I am being smarmy. It amuses me.
Please smile and have humor
If it is a matter of nationalism and ethnic animosity, I don't want to get involved but I would seek to understand. If it is merely a matter of style, to each their own. Please understand who I am. Like I said, barbarian Yank, from Chicago, learned my Spanish from Mexicans, I work as a cook in a nightclub/bar in the city, I like comic books and old school westerns like Magnificent Seven and Outlaw Jose Wales and old Zorro films. This shapes my preferences and tastes, and ignorance.
Don't worry; i can't notice difference between Maxon/Dixon. i understand this like one debate about preferences.
It's a mix on aesthetics and ethnicity, i am myself from the other Castille, The New or Castilla la Mancha, so I come from the mix between Al-Andalus and Castilla. But really on 1220 there are no Spain and there are no French. After all, Flambeau now comes from the Pyrinees, so he would be pre-occitan or en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visigoths), so he would be probably one Vulgar latin - so Frank or Visigotic is not firm right on the VII/VIII, on both sides of the Pyrinees. So, if he was from one side or another, he were not so different. So yes, the discussion is just aesthetic.
Instead, the fact than Navarra is from Languedoc and not Iberia is a great surprise.
I enjoyed this article, it's certainly worth including in a saga IMO, how accurate you want it to be is up to you. Most of the Founders probably have all kinds of writings about them and ascertaining the truth is likely just as difficult. I'm glad the story about the fight in the tower was revisited; always one of my favorites.
yeah, I was sorta trying to walk a fine line between what could be true and what is, playing with the ambiguity.
As for Mason Dixon, that is mostly irrelevant to me. More than a century before I was born. Whole new world nowadays. The only relevance Civil War history has in my life is as a backdrop to some awesome Western movies. The Outlaw Josey Wales is perhaps one of the best western movies of all time. I recommend it. WWII, that is more present and significant to me. I knew people who were in it, such as my grandfather and his brother. WWII is also an awesome setting for movies.
Ever get the feeling that I judge history based mainly on how entertaining it is to me?