>It would be possible - but rather stretching the envelope of what is urban
(and the economic
>potential of only about 120 years) - to scatter a few score Mycenean-style
citadels (as appropriated
>for Balazar) with a hundred odd folk providing logistic support to the
palace to make up the
>14,000 urban population.
That may have been the case for the early Dawn Age Heortlings, but Sartar in the 17th century definitely has at least four centers (at least five if you count Alda-Chur) that are less administrative centers than year-round trade sites. Even if the population of the Sartarite cities is fairly small (which I believe to be the case), Sartar is much more urbanized than the Frankish Empire of the Carolingians.
An important thing to remember is that although the Sartarite cities are economic centers (and centers of learning), political power resides with the rural tribes.
>There is likely to be a significant change between Sartar in 1600 ST and
(abortive rebellion in the
>middle aside) in 1625 due to Lunarization - and it might be possible to
pump up the urban fraction
>by planting a number of Lunar colonia, though we have no real evidence of
such. How far the
>occupation has made the transition of Boldhome from palace, other
public/religious structures, and
>minimal logistic support (servants, associated cultivation), to a centre
of specialised manufacture
>and service sectors of the economy in a generation of occupation, it's
hard to tell. Faster than
>the example of Athens between 700BC and a couple of hundred years later at
its zenith (though I
>likened Jonstown to Athens more on the Academy <==> Lankhor Mhy temple
analogy).
Actually, if anything, I suspect that the Lunar occupation has reduced the cultural importance of the cities. The cities are garrisoned with foreigners and the traditional local trade relationships may have suffered during the occupation. In fact, I wonder if, Lunar propaganda aside, local trade has actually declined under the occupation.
Jeff
Powered by hypermail