Worlds of Design: What State is Your State?

Countries were originally characterized as progressing through several states to “civilized.” This is not in favor today.

viking-4178398_960_720.jpg

Picture courtesy of Pixabay.

"Human progress is neither automatic nor inevitable. Every step toward the goals requires sacrifice, suffering, and struggle; the tireless exertions and passionate concern of dedicated individuals."- Martin Luther King

Though not common today, in the 19th century and earlier, scholars and philosophers sometimes proposed stages that every country “naturally” went through in the “progress” from a indigenous grouping to a “civilized” state. Arnold J. Toynbee (1889–1975) in his 12 volume A Study of History was the most recent well-known proponent of this idea. Another was Oswald Spengler's (1880-1936) The Decline of the West.

When you are serious about building a world for your RPG (or fiction), you may want to adopt some form of national/country progression, if only to help you organize your history. I tried to come up with a set of polity stages that might help organize your world. I’m not presenting these as “progress” that should be desired, though this is certainly how those 19th-century folks thought of it.

The Progression​

Here is the “progression”:
  • Tribe: Frequently governed by a sort of vote. Population of dozens, covers a few square miles. Shamanistic religion, mob military. Subsistence (hunter-gatherer or agricultural) economy
  • Tribal State: Frequently a form of monarchy. Population in thousands, area hundreds of square miles or less. Single religion. Not much military organization. Agriculture required. States require surplus production (usually from agriculture) to have an actual government and religious hierarchy (sometimes combined). This leads to...
  • City-State (Autocracy, Oligarchy, Monarchy, Democracy): E.g. common in Mesopotamia, later in ancient Greece and Renaissance Italy. Population tens of thousands to a few hundred thousand, hundreds to a few thousand square miles, population heavily concentrated in one city. Have a state religion, political leader is usually religious leader as well. Organized military, may even have generals though political leaders are also the military leaders.
  • Independent State/Country: All kinds of governments, but monarchy is most common, though the Roman Republic was not a monarchy. Populations can range in the hundreds of thousands or even more, area can be similar to city state or much larger. Religion may support but not be part of the government, or is part of the government (Roman state religion). Military has its own institutions often separate from politics.
  • Nation-State: At first I listed this as “nation”, but “nation” actually refers to a people of similar ethnicity and language – who may be in separate countries (Italians in both Italy and Switzerland), or may not have an independent country at all. We can think of a “nation-state” stage arising from countries. A strong example is revolutionary/Napoleonic France. This stage won’t necessarily occur, but often has occurred historically. Another is the coalescence of many German principalities into one state.
  • Industrialized Country: You might add one more stage to this, what might be called a modern country or industrialized country. These are usually democracies or autocracies. They may be secular (nonreligious) or closely aligned with some religion, or perhaps with some political ideology. Armies are highly professional, with the entire state providing manpower in wartime (the draft).

Out of Favor​

Toynbee was a tireless cheerleader for his ideas, but after he died they fell out of favor. A major reason for failure was the many exceptions to his progression that he had to try to explain (yes, I read some of his work long ago). There are no doubt exceptions to my explanation above, as well.

Your Turn: How do you classify your world's countries?
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Lewis Pulsipher

Lewis Pulsipher

Dragon, White Dwarf, Fiend Folio
Which world?

My medievaloid fantasy worlds mostly have some variant of feudalism, usually "cleaned up," plus tribal setups in the outlying 'primitive' areas and with other exotic outlying areas away from the centers of PC action having what in the 19th century was called "Oriental despotism."

My main post-feudal, post-medieval setting has strong central monarchies, corresponding mostly to a mix of the OPs "Independent States/Countries" and "Nation-States" with a scattering of city-states, tribal states, and tribes.

My science-fictional worlds can have various science-fictional governments, including a handful that are run by AIs. In these the AIs are aristocrats, more-or-less modeled (both authorially and in-world) on historical aristocracies. The AIs and AI robots are the aristocrats and the humans and other biological-types sapients are commoners.
 

My homebrew world takes advantage of the fantasy setting to have all sorts of government types that never existed or couldn't exist in the real world.

In terms of social development though, the majority of the world is equivalent to 17th century levels of social development where strong nation states with recognized rulers who do exercise real control over the territory they claim are the rule. Some city states exist, but only in the sense of micro-nations that claim very small areas. Tribal levels of development are common outside the six free peoples, such as giants. It gets complex when talking about free peoples. For example, a group of goblins might effectively be functioning as an independent tribe, most likely though this will be occurring because they were pushed out of a nearby goblin nation and are colonizing human controlled land as a safer (though still not very safe) thing than being an outcast tribe in goblin society. But this won't be because the tribe doesn't understand more complex levels of social structure, just that they are trying to avoid being murdered as the losers in some feud. They would see themselves as colonial settlers in a hostile but underpopulated area. The reverse can also happen, and in general everyone is conquering and colonizing everyone else. In some parts of the world there are human tribal nations, mostly in regions that are too overrun with monsters to support civilization as we'd understand the concept. There are some remaining true feudal areas as well, where there is a theoretical sovereign but in practice actual political power is divided amongst a tapestry of city states and tribal states each often acting as its own ethnicity where the king is really a weak emperor who must appease his diverse (nominal) vassals who normally do their own thing and often make war on each other. Fairies are weird exceptions to almost everything, as they tend to ignore the existence of human government and form a tapestry of little tribes and city states living under and often uncaring of the claims of other people groups.
 


A lot of countries are really a collection of smaller units that may themselves contain still smaller units. The modern United States is a collection of 50 states that are basically smaller countries that agreed to give up some aspects of nationhood as the price of admission. States are further subdivided into Counties(a few states use different terms). Counties often contain one or more Cities. Each unit has its own set of laws and regulations, law enforcement. tax authority and type of government.

As a RPG player, my characters rarely interact with anyone much above a local Knight/Lord/Chief/Mayor/Business Owner/Sector Leader/Don/Sheriff/etc. The overall political setup of the place really doesn't matter except as background fluff when your adventure starts with "You meet in a tavern...."
 


Basic idea it's a post-apocalypse world for like the 7th time over, each time leading to a reduction in technological advancement but bringing people closer together because they have to be to survive. There are no great nations, the largest remaining "civilization" is a fortified city-state. And from it is extending a web of syndicated expansions. There are other smaller holdouts that managed to survive the latest apocalypse, and they're all wildly different. Paranoid underground dwelling dwarfs/kobolds/drow/beavers, people who give up their kids to fey lords to receive their protection in the deepest woods, etc.

That largest city-state's government is a pseudo-democracy like the citadel from mass effect, where dedicated groups get representatives. Ancestries, guilds, religious and military organizations, if you can get enough people together you can get your group represented.
 

Your Turn: How do you classify your world's countries?
Only a few categories:
governmentless cultural areas. Including villages below the Monkeysphere level, and many forms of migratory and/or nomadic groups.

Locally governed (above the monkeysphere size)

Hierarchically governed. (axiomatically, above the monkeysphere level,)

It makes little difference whether it's an oligarchy, republic, or feudal monarchy - what's imporant is the level at which law is uniform, and how people will react to outsiders. That last seems to me to generally be Welcoming by governmentless areas - such as the Bedouin, Yupic and Inupiaq, and even the Eklutna.
Local government means that not everyone knows everyone in the local center, be it a large village, a town, or even a smaller city... they tend to have enforcement of law, and a willingness to drive off those who don't merge into the community and don't provide benefit.
Once you get to hierarchical multi-village systems, you get a national identity, firm concept of "Our land, not for you!" And a clear shared identity, which outsiders are often required to prove local value to be accepted. And xenophobia, and a resulting soldiery. Even the most xenophillic hierarchial polities have soldiery, and as they mature, that separates from the civil policing.

Much of the rest varies by technology, and certain technologies do require being hierarchical government simply to obtain and safely use the resources.
 

I think using an outdated hierarchy of state progression isn't helpful in world building.
I prefer to think about it as how a state is governed (monarchy, oligarchy, democracy, etc), how the economy is structured (apprenticeship, guilds, factories, etc), and how society is stratified (hereditary nobility, patriarchy, matriarchy, merit nobility, financial class, etc)
 

I think using an outdated hierarchy of state progression isn't helpful in world building.
It's probably helpful for the GM out there who's thinking, "yeah, my fiendish gnolls were probably tribesmen once. But I want them to be civilized, now. I wonder how they got from there to here?"

Guns, Germs, and Steel seems like a great additional-reading book for this thread.

Also, I think "empire" belongs somewhere near the top of the list. And we can look to . . . Rome? . . . for what could happen at the next stage.
 

Related Articles

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top