Catching Up

I had a pretty busy summer. From June 6th through September 4th, between work and other obligations I had maybe one 24 hour period without something on the calendar. Then, I took a one week staycation and my batteries are still recharged for the moment. Some years life is just like that. It’s a grind and there isn’t a lot you can do about it other than manage and that’s okay. The trick for me is when going through it, to just accept it and just do the things that need getting done and enjoy the breaks when they come. Also, this isn’t a pity party, life is great, it’s just been a busy year. That’s all. Anyway, I’m approaching the horizon of the busy year and next year is looking a little less hectic and I should have more time to get to do more of the things I actually want to do, like this.

About this AI stuff

Every day I read something interesting about AI’s capabilities and I read something stupid about the way it’s regulated. I don’t think we need an “AI Slowdown” as some are proposing, but we do need stronger regulation, and to simply enforce the laws already on the books. The ones about everything from intellectual property to privacy to consent.

For instance, if I build a robot, even one built with the intentions of helping humanity, and that robot “goes rogue” and breaks into someplace, it’s a pretty safe bet I’m going to be held responsible for that and prosecuted and that’s as it should be. That logic should still apply to software and software as a service.

Also, I don’t understand how (for instance) OpenAI makes it’s money. I know there’s a lot of money invested in it, but has it made a product that’s profitable? Right now there are a handful of companies making these things that aren’t profitable and are propping up the whole economy. It’s unsustainable. My prediction based on what little I know about this stuff is within a couple of years most of these companies’ products are just going to be another mechanism to deliver advertising and the ones that don’t go that route are going to make good products that are prohibitively expensive for most people.

and

and look, I get that some of the stuff this stuff can do is amazing, but it still costs a lot more than it produces. There’s a reason we don’t have supersonic travel. The technology has existed for decades and it ultimately was too expensive. Could there be a breakthrough in energy efficiency someday where that won’t be the case anymore? Sure. But Concorde wasn’t subsidized by tax dollars and investors the way these companies are and how that isn’t reflected in their valuations is beyond me. I’m not an economist but I know the difference between making money and losing money.

and and

I’ve been reading a lot of “Learn about AI or get left behind” stuff. Maybe, maybe not. If I find a use for it like any other new technology developed in my lifetime, sure. For instance, I resisted the mp3 file for a long time, and then I adapted when it made sense. I didn’t feel left behind. I’ve been generally late to adopt a lot of things and I never felt like I was “left behind”, and if the shit is really useful, nobody will have to be told to learn about it because they’ll want to anyway. Nobody had to tell me to learn to use a computer or email and nobody had to tell me to get a cell phone when it was time to adapt.

and and and

And that’s about it for now. I just wanted to shake the dust off this thing. ttyl

Istun pienen huoneeni vuoteella ja näpyttelen. Ulkona taivas on kirkas, sinistä vasten ruskanpolttamia puita. Ikkunalauta on pölyn peitossa. Puiden oksista heijastuu huojuvia varjoja huoneen vastakkaiselle seinälle. Sängynpeite on heitetty peiton ja tyynyn päälle huolettomasti, eikä näytä järin siistiltä.

Pöydänkulmallani on puolikas kuppi kahvia. Se on ehtinyt jäähtyä jo tunti sitten, koska eksyin setvimään hostellivarauksia tammikuulle, jolloin aloitan ihan ensimmäisen pidemmän apurahakauteni kirjailijana. (Pidempi tarkoittaa tässä tapauksessa puolta vuotta, mutta minulle se on valtava asia, suunnilleen yhden romaanikäsikirjoituksen mittainen.)

Tässä siis kuva ja nykyhetki, missä ollaan: puutalokommuunin pienessä huoneessa, sängyllä, aika uupuneena, arki moneen suuntaan vinksallaan, katse samaan aikaan tulevassa ja menneessä, nykyhetki vanumassa pois otteesta. Tällaista se kanssani usein on. Siihen on tyytyminen.

Miksi kirjoitan?

Olen miettinyt pitkään blogin perustamista, kokeillutkin sitä. Perustin yhden Substackiin, mutta sitten minulle tultiin kertomaan, että alustaan liittyy kaikenlaisia ongelmia – vähän niin kuin kapitalismin kyllästämässä internetissä ihan kaikkeen. Sitä ennen minulla oli blogi Wordpressissä, mutta Wordpress päätti tarjota sisältöjä tekoälyn kouluttamiseen, ja siitä en pitänyt. (Ei sillä, jossain joku tekoäly varmasti nielaisee nämäkin sanat ahnaisiin kitusiinsa heti kun ne julkaisen, mutta kyse on periaatteesta.)

Pari vuotta kirjoitin myös tarinoita Patreoniin ja sain siitä vähän tulojakin. En ole kuitenkaan koskaan ollut kauhean hyvä pysymään aikatauluissa tai noudattamaan rutiineja, joten kuukausimaksuja vastaan kirjoittaminen kävi ahdistavaksi jo ennen kuin ehti kunnolla alkaakaan. Patreon jäi pölyttymään.

Blogin perustamiseen ja blogiin kirjoittamiseen on kuitenkin useita syitä. Haluan paikan, jossa voin julkaista pieniä tarinoita ja runoja lukijoille helposti ja kenenkään muun sitä ohjailematta tai rajoittamatta. Samoin haluan paikan, jossa voin kirjoittaa ajatuksistani vapaasti pidemmin, merkkimäärien tai julkaisualustojen sitä rajoittamatta. Haluan kirjoittaa kritiikkejä, esseitä, novelleja, matkakertomuksia, ehkä ihan vain päiväkirjaakin. Aika näyttää.

Olen (ollut) muun muassa kolumnisti, toimin(ut) asiantuntijana Ylen Kulttuuriykkösen Perjantaistudiossa, ja minulla on ilo saada kirjoittaa kirjoja, jotka Aula & Co on julkaissut. Kaikki nämä eri kanavat ovat minulle tärkeitä ja arvokkaita, mutta niissä kirjoitan aina jostakin tietystä roolista käsin.

Tässä blogissa kirjoitan ihan vain omana itsenäni ja julkaisen juuri silloin kun siltä tuntuu. En aio tehdä minkäänlaisia lupauksia sisällöstä tai päivitystiheydestä, koska täällä ei tarvitse. Se on ihanaa se.

„Obwohl sich die Sicherheit vor den Menschen bis zu einem gewissen Grad durch wohlgefestigte Macht und Reichtum ergibt, so entsteht doch die reinste Sicherheit aus der Ruhe und dem Rückzug vor der Masse.“ (KD 14) [1]

Wer sich heute zurückzieht, versieht die Abwesenheit oft gleich mit einer Funktion. Eine Woche ohne Smartphone soll den Kopf freimachen, das Retreat neue Energie liefern, das Sabbatical Abstand schaffen. Danach geht es weiter. Der Rückzug wird zum Unterbruch, der die Rückkehr in dieselben Anforderungen erleichtert.

Epikurs Garten führt zu einer anderen Vorstellung. Auch sein Rückzug verfolgt einen Zweck: Sicherheit, Seelenruhe und ein gutes Leben. Dieses gute Leben beginnt jedoch bereits im Rückzug. Der Garten ist kein „Wartungsintervall“ für eine spätere Rückkehr in den Wettbewerb. Er gehört zu einer Lebensweise, die den Wert dieses Wettbewerbs selbst prüft.

Wie viel von dem, was uns beschäftigt, brauchen wir tatsächlich? Und welche Abhängigkeiten entstehen erst dadurch, dass wir etwas für unverzichtbar halten?

Ein Garten ausserhalb des Spiels

Epikur gründete in Athen eine philosophische Gemeinschaft, die als „der Garten“ bekannt wurde. Sie verband philosophische Praxis mit einem Leben unter Freunden und hielt Abstand zur politischen und gesellschaftlichen Konkurrenz der Polis. Die #Epikur zugeschriebene Formel lathe biosas, meist als „lebe im Verborgenen“ wiedergegeben, passt zu dieser Haltung. In seinen erhaltenen Schriften findet sie sich allerdings nicht; ihre enge Verbindung mit der epikureischen Tradition ist vorwiegend durch spätere Überlieferung bezeugt [2].

Der vierzehnte Hauptlehrsatz, der am Anfang dieses Beitrags steht (KD 14), begründet den Rückzug mit Sicherheit. Macht und Reichtum können Schutz verschaffen; Epikur misst der Ruhe und Distanz zur Masse jedoch den höheren Wert bei. Für die Gegenwart lässt sich daraus eine weiterführende Frage ableiten: Wer sein Wohlergehen an Ansehen, Einfluss und öffentliche Anerkennung bindet, überlässt einen Teil davon Umständen, über die andere verfügen.

Rückzug betrifft unter diesen Voraussetzungen mehr als räumliche Distanz. Zur Disposition steht auch, welche Güter überhaupt als Voraussetzung eines gelungenen Lebens gelten.

Wie viel benötigt ein gutes Leben?

Hier kommt die autarkeia, die Selbstgenügsamkeit, ins Spiel. Im Brief an Menoikeus nennt Epikur sie „ein grosses Gut“. Er verbindet damit ausdrücklich keine Forderung nach möglichst karger Lebensführung. Wer Selbstgenügsamkeit übt, soll auch mit wenig auskommen können, wenn das Viele fehlt (Ep. Men. 130). Überfluss darf Freude machen, verliert aber seinen Rang als Voraussetzung des Wohlbefindens.

Ein Kriterium dafür liefert die epikureische Begierdenlehre. Einige Begierden sind natürlich und notwendig, andere natürlich, aber entbehrlich, weitere entstehen aus „leeren Meinungen“ (KD 29–30; Ep. Men. 127). Vereinfacht lässt sich das an drei Beispielen zeigen: Hunger verlangt Nahrung. Ein aufwendiges Mahl kann angenehm sein, ohne erforderlich zu werden. Ruhm und grenzenloser Reichtum besitzen dagegen kein natürliches Sättigungsmass. Gerade weil ihnen eine solche Grenze fehlt, können sie immer weiter anwachsen.

Selbstgenügsamkeit fragt somit, wie viele äussere Bedingungen erfüllt sein müssen, bevor wir uns ein gutes Leben zugestehen. Mit jeder zusätzlichen Bedingung wächst die Abhängigkeit von Geld, Status, Zustimmung oder günstigen Umständen.

Eine epikureische Sentenz aus dem Gnomologium Vaticanum fasst den Zusammenhang knapp: „Die bedeutendste Frucht der Selbstgenügsamkeit ist die Freiheit“ (VS 77). Diese Freiheit bezeichnet keinen Zustand völliger Unabhängigkeit. Sie eröffnet Spielraum gegenüber dem, was die Welt gewähren oder verweigern kann.

Warum Autarkie Freunde braucht

Hier entsteht eine offensichtliche Spannung. Epikur misst der Freundschaft ausserordentlich hohen Wert bei. In den Kyriai doxai zählt er sie zu den wichtigsten Gütern, welche die Weisheit für das #Glück bereitstellt (KD 27). Freunde schaffen Vertrauen, Nähe und Sicherheit. Der selbstgenügsame Mensch bleibt also auf andere angewiesen.

Simon Varga rekonstruiert zwei Dimensionen epikureischer Autarkie: eine äussere oder physische und eine innere oder psychische [3]. Die äussere Dimension betrifft den Umgang mit materiellen Bedingungen und verfügbaren Gütern. Die innere zielt auf die Fähigkeit, Begierden, Ängste und fremde Meinungen vernünftig zu beurteilen und ein eigenes Urteil zu bewahren. Beides wird im Garten gemeinsam mit anderen eingeübt.

Freundschaft verändert damit die Art der Abhängigkeit. Sie antwortet auf Bedürfnisse nach Nähe, Vertrauen und Sicherheit, die innerhalb der epikureischen Lebensform einen begrenzbaren Platz besitzen. Ruhm, Status oder grenzenloser Reichtum folgen dagegen Wünschen, denen keine natürliche Grenze gesetzt ist. Die Begierdenlehre erklärt damit auch, weshalb eine Beziehung zu Freunden und die Abhängigkeit von öffentlicher Anerkennung philosophisch verschieden bewertet werden können.

Autarkie bedeutet bei Epikur folglich keine Beziehungslosigkeit. Sie bleibt sozial eingebettet. Gerade die Gemeinschaft kann Menschen darin unterstützen, äussere Ansprüche zu begrenzen und die eigene Urteilskraft zu entwickeln.

Das Gefängnis der Geschäftigkeit

Einige überlieferte Sentenzen formulieren die Distanz zur öffentlichen Welt ausgesprochen scharf. Im Gnomologium Vaticanum heisst es: „Jeder muss sich selbst aus dem Gefängnis befreien, das Alltagsgeschäfte und Politik bilden“ (VS 58).

Einer Gegenwart, in der selbst Erholung häufig mit Konzentration, #Resilienz oder späterer Leistungsfähigkeit begründet wird, ist dieser Satz fremd. Digital Detox, Retreat oder Minimalismus können Abstand schaffen und gleichzeitig problemlos in die bestehende Leistungslogik passen. Man zieht sich zurück, erholt sich und kehrt leistungsfähiger zurück.

Epikurs Frage reicht weiter: Warum nehme ich an einem Wettbewerb teil, dessen Preis ich vielleicht gar nicht brauche?

Der Garten verändert damit die Perspektive auf Belastung. Manche Anforderungen müssen nicht besser bewältigt werden, wenn bereits ihre Voraussetzungen fragwürdig geworden sind.

Der politische Einwand

An dieser Stelle stösst die Übertragung auf die Gegenwart an eine Grenze. Moderne demokratische Gesellschaften sind auf Menschen angewiesen, die öffentliche Aufgaben übernehmen, Entscheidungen mittragen und Institutionen erhalten. Wer deren Schutz geniesst und sich dauerhaft aus ihrer Gestaltung heraushält, profitiert von einer Arbeit, die andere leisten. Der Vorwurf des Trittbrettfahrens lässt sich durch persönliche Seelenruhe kaum ausräumen.

Ganz fremd ist Epikur diese gesellschaftliche Dimension allerdings nicht. In den Kyriai doxai versteht er Recht als eine Vereinbarung zum gegenseitigen Nutzen, durch die Menschen vermeiden sollen, einander Schaden zuzufügen oder Schaden zu erleiden (KD 31–38). Auch Regeln und Institutionen besitzen für eine epikureische Lebensform insofern einen Wert, als sie Sicherheit ermöglichen. Seine Texte entwickeln daraus jedoch kein Kriterium dafür, wie viel aktive politische Beteiligung ein einzelner Mensch einer solchen Ordnung schuldet.

Hier endet die unmittelbare Auskunftskraft der epikureischen Lehre. Für moderne Verhältnisse bleibt eine Unterscheidung hilfreich: Die Verantwortung für gemeinsame Institutionen ist etwas anderes als die Konkurrenz um Status, Einfluss und Sichtbarkeit. Wer sich dem Zweiten entzieht, muss sich deshalb nicht zwangsläufig auch dem ersten entziehen.

Der politische Einwand bleibt trotzdem bestehen. Ein Leben im Garten setzt Bedingungen voraus, die nicht allein im Garten geschaffen werden.

Der Garten als Gedankenfigur

Seine stärkste Wirkung entfaltet der Garten als Gedankenfigur. Er lenkt den Blick auf die Liste dessen, was einem guten Leben vermeintlich vorausgehen muss. Noch etwas erreichen, erledigen, verdienen oder absichern – und erst danach soll Zeit für das Eigentliche bleiben.

Eine epikureische Sentenz formuliert den Preis dieses Aufschiebens drastisch: „Das Leben aber vergeht unter lauter Zögern und jeder Einzelne von uns stirbt, ohne auch nur einmal Musse gehabt zu haben“ (VS 14). Das Problem liegt auch in den Voraussetzungen, die wir dem guten Leben voranstellen. Solange sie als notwendig gelten, muss das Eigentliche warten.

Epikurs Unterscheidung der Begierden bietet dafür einen Prüfstein: Ein Bedürfnis kann eine natürliche Grenze besitzen, eine angenehme Ergänzung entbehrlich bleiben oder ein Wunsch gerade deshalb wachsen, weil ihm kein solches Mass gesetzt ist. Die Frage nach Selbstgenügsamkeit wird so zur Frage nach den Bedingungen, unter denen wir zu leben bereit sind.

Wenn unser Leben begrenzt ist, welchen Dingen wollen wir darin die Macht geben, notwendig zu erscheinen?

---

💬 Kommentieren (nur für write.as-Accounts)

---

Quellen

[1] Alle Epikur-Zitate werden in den Übersetzungen von VS: Rapp (2010), KD: Hossenfelder (2010) und Ep. Men.: Gigon (1991) wiedergegeben.

[2] G. Roskam, Live Unnoticed (Lathe biosas): On the Vicissitudes of an Epicurean Doctrine. Leiden: Brill, 2007.

[3] S. Varga, „Leben im Verborgenen: Autarkie im Garten des Epikur“, Mnemosyne, Bd. 77, Nr. 4, S. 589–614, 2024, doi: 10.1163/1568525X-BJA10186.

Bildquelle Max Liebermann (1880–1945): Die Gartenbank, Alte Nationalgalerie, Berlin, Public Domain (Wikimedia Commons).

Disclaimer Teile dieses Texts wurden mit Deepl Write (Korrektorat und Lektorat) überarbeitet. Für die Recherche in den erwähnten Werken/Quellen und in meinen Notizen wurde Gemini Notebook (ehem. NotebookLM) von Google verwendet.

Topic #Philosophie | #GegenDenStrich

Our Father Who art in Heaven Hallowed be Thy name Thy Kingdom come Thy will be done on Earth as it is in Heaven Give us this day our daily Bread And forgive us our trespasses As we forgive those who trespass against us And lead us not into temptation But deliver us from evil

Amen

Jesus is Lord! Come Lord Jesus!

Come Lord Jesus! Christ is Lord!

This space recognizes and affirms National Day for Truth and Reconciliation in its solemnity and importance, within Canada and to First Nations.

Away

Our keep to here This awful well And purpose to remain Within ourselves- and ransom Mystery of Man If getting better- is our known Rewild first A’crossing land Both curious amount And to our city- recourse And changing then What hearts hear And what amend To distance grave For themselves And us alone Our value paid To those wolves In then we sleep Nations heard Heading back- to survival And Justice due Winning this pyre To bird and feather As replete; The distance claim What righting cross- can outrun And due in course- what they know Forever friends At our keep.

I have been noticing a couple of disturbing trends this year outside of the AI/LLM bubble. Has anyone else noticed them?

First, domain registrars seem to be raising domain name prices like never before. Every couple of months, I get an email from Porkbun or Cloudflare saying that the registry controlling a domain's TLD is raising prices on such-and-such a date. I can't remember the last time I saw domain name prices decrease. They only seem to go up.

That is why I try to renew domains for more than one or two years whenever I can. If my budget allows, I will pay for all 10 years upfront rather than wait for the next price increase.

The other trend may be worse. Personal blogs and websites from people who have been on the web for a long time are going silent or disappearing altogether. A few people give notice that they are taking a break or leaving, but most just disappear without anything but a 404.

I am not sure what is causing that. Burnout, social media replacing personal sites, hosting complexity (including rising costs), aging communities, lack of feedback, and people simply losing interest could all be part of it. I suspect some of these things feed into each other.

Let's face it, the personal blogging and independent website community seems to me to skew older these days. Many of the people still maintaining their own sites have been doing it for 10, 20, or even 25 years. I would not be surprised if a large portion of the traditional personal blogging community is now over 40 (I am not including traditional social media such as TikTok, Snapchat, or Instagram in that statement. This is simply my observation). An aging community mixed with social media burnout probably does not help.

With domain prices, I wonder if some registry operators are simply taking advantage of rising costs and higher prices throughout the tech industry. Many of the companies controlling these TLDs are large corporations.

Everyone keeps saying the AI bubble around RAM, storage, and other hardware will burst any day. Things seem to be getting worse instead. Maybe things have to get worse before they get better.

I don't know. Sometimes it feels like the industry is moving toward giving the masses just enough hardware to get online, but not enough to do much locally. Companies would do the heavy lifting for us through subscriptions and cloud services.

I don't want or need another monthly subscription. Soon, our paychecks will be divvied up among all the subscription services and sent directly to them, with no need to even pass through our bank accounts.

Maybe I am missing another cause, but these are trends I have been noticing more and more.

Will the ultimate result be that people are eventually priced out of owning their own domain names and hardware for homelabs and selfhosting?

Those one-year introductory deals are great for domain names, but the renewals are what get you. I think Porkbun and Cloudflare are great companies, and they try to keep costs as low as possible (in my opinion). Ultimately, it is not their fault if the registries behind the TLDs keep raising prices. They cannot operate at a loss either and I understand that.

I just wonder where all of this ends.

#blogging #personal #technology

J'ai tellement peur Sauter dans le vide M'élancer dans l'air Mais cette sensation d'apesanteur Oublier le corps meurtri Oui

---

“Hang Gliders” by WhyDolls is licensed under CC BY-NC-ND 2.0.

Jerusalem Bell

What honest light The vetterances may In timely afold In stirring water To this suffering amend And surely plot for courage Abundances yew In making trite our man Assistance live The courtesy amok- and running near Jerusalem our code In mighting Lord Vestments of a seal And praying then- This day misabandon A timely now And one missed opportunity But then reclaim- Our one thing unrewept Is staying small The vigour and uncour What missal time And making early tine To this our mourning And staying days- alone and sureness to exclaim What light is proper And to Winter- and our World To see these eyes The beautiful anew And dawn our candour Jerusalem is well But aching beam unfete And living dyke To wash up on our feet The time is first And water unrepair Two thoughts for five In living ore The nightly view and fire To this date repay And what is right at year Missal and rematch A living Scot for then her part In golden domes forever The lot is Holy And wanted in repair What night does give return And until day At Yom Kippur.

Better start to the morning today: Exercise followed by a chickpea scramble, together with cottage cheese mixed with diced tomato and kalamata olives and a side of cucumber.

Freshly-minted short story shipped off to Jared Shurin for his forthcoming edited issue of ParSec. The brief he sent me, a single image, was impossible to resist:

More TIMES NEW HUMAN rewrites this morning, reserving the backend of the day for email and podcast notes.

Inbox: 17, RSS: 5.

#journal #work

I feel like I see similarities to how I grew up online and the attention that came with the spaces I would sometimes hang around. I feel like I’m almost playing the same game with Hinge again. I don’t know if that’s good.

---

photo @HoppMotion licensed under CC BY-NC-SA

5 September 2026

A mosquito net arcs over our bed in Seoul like an airy little mountain, or like an upright wishbone. Viewed from below while lying supine, the apex of the net appears to be descending upon you for an embrace with its central webbing stretched outwards by four limbs, almost like a flying squirrel mid-glide. At night this effect is heightened—dimmed light makes the fine netting body disappear around its structure. And the pink curtains in the room, which used to belong to Yena's grandmother, throw a rosy filter over the whole scene.

At the MMCA's Korea Artist Prize show, I spent the most time in Hong Jin-hwon's room looking at a single printed image he made of what appears to be rain and condensation on a window on a gray and gloomy day. Water droplets are foregrounded, the surface acting as the window. In the distance are two dark and blurred shapes; to me they first read as oil pumpjacks, but on closer inspection, one of them looks like a large statue of a figure pointing with an extended arm, and the other looks almost like a large abstracted kinetic sculpture of some kind. On top of all of that (visually) are scattered splotches of what looks like black paint or ink. The effect is an all-over flattening, three levels of perception compressed into an intervening barrier that is inhibiting but porous nevertheless.

3 September 2026

“Sedentario” From Echado a perder (2007) by Carlos Pardo

También aquí querré perpetuarme, en la vejez: un ancla vertebral en la orilla a despecho del sello rutinario del mar, de las amputaciones de paisaje del molino de viento.

***

“Sedentary”—English translation by Curtis Bauer

I will also want to perpetuate myself here, in old age: a vertabral anchor on the shore in spite of the humdrum stamp of the sea, of the landscape’s amputations of a windmill.

It's been a long, long time since I wrote a post for this blog. There have been a lot of things going on in life such as getting a new real job, various ups and downs that have occurred over the past pretty much 8 months, so on and so forth. The thing that has never wavered is that we need a new vision for American Football. Well, an update on that, let's begin.

We have talked about entity structure, indoor v. outdoor, player safety, unscrupulous billionaires ruining the sport, and various other things in this blog. We have discussed whether this would be one league or many leagues which quite frankly is still up for debate. With all sorts of money now being invested in flag football by the kinds of people we are trying to work around, flag football unfortunately isn't the way to go for this either. Full disclosure, flag football is great, it's just not going to be the way forward to fully encapsulate the vision I've set out to do (which I hopefully will accomplish but to be honest, there is absolutely no guarantee on that).

So I have actually come up with an idea. It needs to be flushed out and an entity of some sort would need to be formed before any sort of announcement could be made, but yes, the Brand New Shield is still on my radar. Unfortunately my entries on this blog will be more intermittent than consistent because of everything else going on in life, but that aside, let's talk more about what it would take for this idea to actually become a thing.

First, an entity would have to be formed along with a web presence. This is actually by far the easiest step in the entire process. After that it'd be securing the related intellectual property such as trademarks and copyrights which can take months, sometimes years depending on if someone contests a filing or not. It only gets harder from there as there'd have to be some influx of capital whether that's a media rights deal, fundraising through Sasketchewan Roughriders style shares of said entity, what have you.... I mentioned the Roughriders here because if I'm going to have to raise capital to do this, I'm going to go the populist route here. Then there's market research, securing deals with venues once the markets are decided, flushing out the personnel for all the teams, gaining player interests, the whole nine yards if you will. There is a lot that goes into creating a sports league which is why most ideas either don't get off the ground or if they do, they don't last long.

In short, this is all a long shot at best, but I wanted to give you all an update. The reason why there is no Kickstarter or Indiegogo or anything like that is because I refuse to put any of you in a situation where you invested your money and your time only to be let down. We've all been there, and I absolutely refuse to do that to anyone else.

Keep believing in football for the people, it will happen, whether it's by me or someone else.

Rise of Reason- Part 6: The War of the Tributary States

The eight-year détente following the Granite War ended first in the south. Although relations between the Enclave of Reason and the Scimitar had deteriorated for years, the conflict that followed was not initially a conventional territorial war between two clearly bounded states. It developed instead from competing claims over tributary cities, agricultural districts, trading settlements, and semi-independent communities located between the Enclave's expanding southern provinces and the territories dominated by the Scimitar confederation.

For the Enclave, these regions represented the continuation of the political system it had developed during the assimilation of the Forest People. Communities could enter its sphere through negotiated incorporation, receive roads, schools, medical institutions, military protection, and access to relatively predictable taxation, and gradually become integrated into the larger administrative structure. For the Scimitar, many of the same communities belonged to a much older tributary system in which political authority was measured less by permanent administration than by the ability to demand payment, military service, grazing access, and recognition of Scimitar supremacy.

The difference between these systems had already produced disputes before the Scimitar civil war. The conflict became considerably more serious after that civil war ended under a leader whose political legitimacy depended heavily upon reversing the territorial losses of the preceding years.

The Rise of Kharan Veyr

The eventual victor of the Scimitar civil war was Kharan Veyr, a military commander with no blood relationship to the previous First Rider or any of the principal families that initially competed to succeed him. His rise represented an important break with earlier Scimitar politics.

Veyr had been born into a relatively minor horse-breeding clan in the western drylands. His family possessed enough animals and followers to participate in seasonal campaigns but held little influence in the assemblies of the major riding houses. He first gained prominence as a caravan commander and later as a subordinate cavalry officer during campaigns against rebellious tributary towns. Contemporary descriptions emphasize his logistical ability as much as his personal military reputation. Veyr developed a following by keeping mounted forces supplied over unusually long distances, distributing captured wealth promptly, and recruiting capable riders without regard to their clan status.

During the succession crisis, he initially supported one of the weaker claimants to the First Rider's position. When that coalition collapsed, Veyr retained control of a substantial portion of its mounted forces and refused to submit to either of the surviving dynastic factions. Over the following two years he attracted younger commanders, minor clans excluded from the traditional distribution of tribute, and veterans whose livelihoods had deteriorated as civil war disrupted the old system.

His political program combined military restoration with criticism of the established leadership. Veyr argued that the Scimitar had declined because prominent families had become more concerned with dividing tribute among themselves than maintaining the authority from which tribute ultimately depended. The loss of border communities to the Enclave became central to his rhetoric. Towns that had paid the Scimitar for generations had been permitted, in his account, to leave during a period of weakness, while Enclave administrators had converted temporary disorder into permanent territorial expansion.

Veyr promised a return to what his supporters described as the Age of the Long Rein, an idealized period in which Scimitar riders had supposedly crossed the southern plains without serious opposition and tributary rulers had competed for their protection. The historical accuracy of this image was questionable, but it proved politically effective. Veyr did not advocate restoration of the previous administrative arrangements so much as renewed military dominance, lower internal taxation on the riding clans, and a revival of wealth obtained through tribute and campaigning.

By the final stage of the civil war, his coalition had become the largest independent cavalry force within the Scimitar core territories. Several major clans recognized him after he defeated one dynastic claimant and negotiated the submission of another. Rather than adopt the lineage of the previous ruling family, Veyr presented his lack of dynastic connection as evidence that command had returned to military merit. An assembly of major riding houses subsequently recognized him as First Rider.

The victory did not reunify every former Scimitar dependency. A number of tributary cities remained effectively independent, and several border regions had already entered Enclave protection. Veyr nevertheless restored sufficient unity to resume coordinated military operations, and the recovery of lost tributaries became one of the principal means through which he maintained the coalition that had brought him to power.

The Resumption of Raiding

Veyr did not initially declare war on the Enclave. Direct attacks against its fortified settlements would have placed Scimitar cavalry at a serious technological disadvantage and risked the kind of concentrated engagements that Enclave military doctrine favored. Instead, the first campaigns focused on the loosely defended political network surrounding Enclave territory.

Trading stations were robbed or burned. Agricultural settlements that had recently accepted Enclave protection were subjected to livestock seizures. Local rulers who had stopped paying tribute during the civil war were ordered to resume payments, and those refusing sometimes saw crops destroyed or prominent families taken as hostages. Merchant caravans traveling beyond regularly patrolled roads became frequent targets.

Scimitar commanders generally avoided heavily defended positions. When Enclave infantry or artillery approached, mounted forces withdrew before a major engagement could develop. The mobility of the Scimitar allowed raiding groups to disperse across multiple routes and reassemble elsewhere, while the Enclave's best regular forces remained concentrated around roads, towns, and supply centers.

The result exposed a structural weakness created by Enclave expansion. Its core territories, including the Vale, the former Forest regions, and the three Granitefist fortress districts, were relatively secure. The difficulty lay in defending the network of allied communities, recently incorporated settlements, trading partners, and protected roads extending beyond them.

A permanent Enclave garrison could defeat most Scimitar raiding forces that attempted a direct attack. There were not enough permanent garrisons to defend every village.

The problem was as much political as military. Communities had entered the Enclave system largely because it promised greater security and more predictable government than neighboring alternatives. If the Enclave could not protect those communities from raids, the credibility of further incorporation would decline. Conversely, defending every small settlement would require dispersing soldiers across a frontier hundreds of miles long, precisely the situation that favored Scimitar mobility.

During the first months of renewed raiding, Enclave authorities attempted to avoid escalation. Local commanders were authorized to pursue attackers only a limited distance beyond recognized boundaries, and retaliatory raids into Scimitar territory were prohibited without central approval. Diplomats continued communicating with Veyr's government through merchants and neutral tributary rulers.

The Southern Settlement Proposal

The Enclave eventually proposed a comprehensive arrangement intended to resolve both the trade disputes inherited from the previous decade and the status of communities along the contested frontier. The proposal, usually known in later histories as the Southern Settlement, was considerably more favorable to the Scimitar than later Enclave propaganda acknowledged.

The first provision established a ten-year nonaggression agreement. Both sides would recognize the territory they currently administered and suspend new claims while a joint commission investigated disputed communities. Settlements with recent tributary obligations to the Scimitar would not be incorporated into the Enclave without review, while the Scimitar would refrain from collecting tribute from communities already under established Enclave administration.

A second provision replaced the irregular system of caravan taxation with fixed commercial charges. Enclave merchants would pay a standardized transit duty at designated Scimitar markets and crossings, after which additional clan or local levies would be prohibited. In return, the Enclave offered to recognize the Scimitar's right to collect those duties and agreed to direct a substantial portion of southern commerce through approved markets.

The proposal also recognized traditional grazing corridors used by Scimitar pastoral groups. Herds could enter defined frontier areas seasonally without those movements being interpreted as territorial claims, provided armed escorts remained below agreed limits.

A fourth section concerned border security. Each side would be responsible for suppressing banditry within its own territory and returning identifiable stolen livestock or commercial goods when possible. Mixed tribunals would adjudicate disputes involving merchants or border communities.

The most controversial provision established a procedure for determining the allegiance of disputed tributary settlements. Local councils or assemblies would declare whether they wished to remain tributary to the Scimitar, join the Enclave, or retain independent status under guarantees from both powers. The Enclave presented this as a means of avoiding war over communities whose political ties had historically been ambiguous. Veyr's advisers regarded it as particularly dangerous because communities dissatisfied with tribute would have been given a legal mechanism to leave the Scimitar system.

To offset the likely loss of some tributaries, the Enclave offered substantial economic concessions. Scimitar merchants would receive access to designated Enclave markets at reduced tariffs, and Enclave physicians and veterinarians would be permitted to establish medical stations along several major trade routes. The government also offered annual payments for guaranteed protection of specified caravan corridors, effectively converting some traditional tribute practices into formal commercial contracts.

From the Enclave perspective, the proposal exchanged money and commercial access for a stable southern frontier. From Veyr's perspective, it threatened to formalize precisely the contraction of Scimitar authority that his rise had promised to reverse.

He nevertheless agreed to negotiations.

The Aruk Wells Massacre

The diplomatic conference was arranged at Aruk Wells, a settlement outside the established control of either power. The location was used by several pastoral groups and contained a large seasonal market, making it familiar to merchants and representatives from both political systems. Neutral local leaders were asked to guarantee access, and both delegations agreed to restrictions on the number of armed escorts permitted within the meeting area.

The Enclave delegation included senior diplomats, commercial officials, two legal scholars involved in drafting the Southern Settlement, interpreters, and a small protective detachment. Veyr did not attend personally. The Scimitar delegation was headed by one of his principal commanders and included representatives from several riding houses with claims in the disputed border districts.

The events that followed became one of the most influential diplomatic incidents in early Enclave history. Scimitar accounts surviving from the period are fragmentary, but the available evidence strongly supports the conclusion reached by later historians that the attack was planned in advance.

On the second day of negotiations, Scimitar forces entered the market area in numbers substantially greater than those permitted under the conference agreement. The Enclave delegation was surrounded and attacked before its escort could establish an organized defense. Of approximately sixty Enclave diplomats, officials, interpreters, guards, and attendants, fewer than ten survived. Several escaped through the market during the confusion, while a small number were captured and released months later.

Scimitar authorities subsequently claimed that the Enclave delegation had violated the neutrality agreement by concealing weapons and attempting to bribe local leaders. No convincing evidence was produced. Enclave investigators instead concluded that the conference had been used deliberately to eliminate experienced diplomats and demonstrate that Veyr would not negotiate from a position that recognized Enclave territorial gains.

Historians continue to debate Veyr's precise objective. The massacre may have been intended to provoke a war that would unify the riding clans behind him. It may also have been designed as a demonstration to wavering tributaries that negotiations with the Enclave would not protect them from Scimitar power. Both interpretations are consistent with his political position after the civil war.

Whatever its original purpose, Aruk Wells eliminated the faction within the Enclave government that still favored accommodation. The council formally abandoned the Southern Settlement and authorized military operations against Scimitar forces and any commanders participating in attacks on Enclave-protected communities.

The conflict that followed became known as the War of the Tributaries.

Enclave Defensive Reorganization

The first Enclave objective was not invasion but the denial of profitable targets. The experience of the preceding raids had demonstrated that small isolated settlements could not all be defended individually. Military planners therefore reorganized the southern frontier around fortified nodes connected by roads and rapid-response forces.

Population from the most exposed hamlets was encouraged to relocate temporarily into larger settlements during periods of heightened Scimitar activity. Grain stores and livestock markets were moved behind defended perimeters where practical. Watchtowers were linked through signal systems, allowing reports of mounted raiders to travel faster than messengers alone.

The Enclave also expanded the use of mobile columns, generally composed of mounted infantry, local cavalry, rifle detachments, and light artillery. These units could not match Scimitar horsemen in sustained movement across open country, but the road network constructed during the preceding détente allowed them to move rapidly between threatened districts. Their purpose was usually not to pursue raiders deep into Scimitar territory, but to intercept them near river crossings, market towns, or established return routes.

Fortification design reflected the character of the threat. The Enclave did not surround every settlement with expensive stone walls. Ditches, timber palisades, earthen ramparts, protected firing platforms, and strong central compounds could be constructed more quickly and were sufficient against cavalry lacking heavy artillery. Grain depots and wells received particular protection because Scimitar raids often sought to destroy supplies rather than occupy settlements.

The effects became apparent during the first campaign year. Raids continued, but the quantity of livestock, grain, and captives obtained by Scimitar forces declined. Several raiding parties suffered heavy losses after attacking settlements whose apparently modest defenses concealed firearms and light cannon. Others withdrew when signal networks brought Enclave reinforcements more rapidly than expected.

The Scimitar retained the ability to cause disruption, but its original strategy depended upon raids being both politically intimidating and economically profitable. As the Enclave hardened vulnerable points and removed easy targets, that balance deteriorated.

The Tributary Strategy

The Enclave's offensive strategy developed from a different assessment of Scimitar weakness. The core mounted population was difficult to conquer directly. It was highly mobile, accustomed to living across large distances, and lacked a small number of fixed political centers whose occupation would necessarily end resistance. Invading the Scimitar heartland would therefore have required the Enclave to operate far from its roads and supply depots while attempting to force battle against an enemy able to withdraw almost indefinitely.

The tributary system was considerably more vulnerable.

Veyr's victory in the civil war had depended in part upon renewed extraction from settled communities. Campaigning armies required grain, animals, metal, textiles, and coin, while the riding clans expected the new First Rider to restore distributions disrupted during the succession struggle. Several tributary rulers consequently faced heavier demands after reunification than they had before the civil war.

Enclave intelligence identified cities and agricultural districts where repeated requisitions had generated significant opposition. Rather than call for a general rebellion, the Enclave began establishing covert relationships with individual councils, merchant associations, local military leaders, and displaced rulers.

Small specialist teams were sent into selected territories. These groups were usually far smaller than later popular accounts suggested, often numbering only several dozen soldiers, engineers, instructors, physicians, and communications specialists. Their purpose was to improve the ability of local forces to organize, fortify towns, coordinate with neighboring communities, and resist Scimitar retaliation.

The Enclave remained cautious about distributing its most advanced weapons. Rebel forces generally received older smoothbore firearms, standardized powder, and training rather than current Enclave artillery designs. Light cannon were supplied to strategically important cities where Enclave personnel could supervise their use.

Printing became an important component of the campaign. The Enclave produced translated statements describing the terms available to communities that left the Scimitar tribute system. These promises varied by local circumstances but generally included fixed taxation, retention of existing municipal councils, access to Enclave markets, protection from arbitrary requisition, and gradual introduction of schools and medical institutions. Religious conversion was not made an immediate condition of association, a departure from some earlier missionary practices among the Forest People.

The difference between Scimitar and Enclave demands was deliberately emphasized. Veyr required tributaries to demonstrate submission through payments whose size could change according to military needs. The Enclave offered taxes that were often substantial but published in advance and accompanied by visible administrative services.

The policy did not produce universal support. Several tributary cities remained loyal to the Scimitar because their elites benefited from existing arrangements, feared Enclave cultural assimilation, or regarded Veyr as the stronger protector. Others attempted to remain neutral. In at least two cases, uprisings encouraged by Enclave agents collapsed before military assistance arrived, resulting in executions and large-scale confiscation by Scimitar commanders.

These failures led the Enclave to coordinate later revolts more carefully.

The Rising of the Five Markets

The first major synchronized uprising occurred during the latter half of the first campaign year in a group of prosperous market towns located along intersecting grain and livestock routes. Enclave records refer to the episode as the Rising of the Five Markets, although several smaller settlements participated as well.

The towns had suffered repeated requisitions during the Scimitar civil war and had subsequently been assessed additional contributions to support Veyr's reunified army. Local merchant councils initially petitioned for reductions rather than independence. When those petitions failed, representatives established contact with Enclave agents.

The revolt was coordinated to begin immediately after the principal Scimitar tax detachments had moved north with collected grain and livestock. Local militias seized customs compounds, arrested or expelled remaining tribute officials, and closed the main roads to Scimitar patrols. Enclave engineering teams had previously helped strengthen several town defenses, while firearms and powder had been concealed in commercial warehouses.

The political importance of the Five Markets exceeded their military value. Their simultaneous defection demonstrated that rebellion did not necessarily leave an individual town isolated. Several nearby communities requested association with the Enclave within weeks.

Veyr responded by sending cavalry to restore authority. Two of the smaller towns were briefly retaken, but the larger market centers held behind fortified positions until Enclave columns arrived. The inability of Scimitar forces to punish the revolt decisively encouraged further defections during the following year.

By the beginning of the second campaign season, the war had expanded well beyond the original border. Scimitar armies still dominated large areas of open country, but an increasing number of settled communities either supported the Enclave openly or refused tribute to both sides.

The Expansion of the Revolt

The Enclave's campaign against the tribute system depended upon creating clusters of associated settlements rather than isolated enclaves. Roads and rivers connecting sympathetic towns were therefore treated as strategic objectives. Engineers repaired bridges, established supply depots, and fortified junctions while military columns attempted to keep corridors open.

Incorporation varied significantly. Some communities became full Enclave territories relatively quickly, particularly those already adjacent to existing provinces. Others entered as protected city-states whose councils retained considerable internal authority. Several merely signed defensive agreements while postponing any decision on permanent political affiliation.

This flexibility helped accelerate defections because local rulers did not necessarily have to surrender all authority immediately. It also created administrative problems that would become increasingly important after the war. By its second year, the Enclave was protecting a patchwork of provinces, associated cities, allied councils, and military corridors governed under different agreements.

The Scimitar response combined punishment with renewed offers of accommodation. Communities that returned to tribute voluntarily were sometimes granted temporary reductions, while those considered responsible for organizing broader resistance could face confiscation, hostage-taking, or destruction of agricultural stores. This uneven policy reflected political divisions within Veyr's coalition. Some commanders favored restoration of the old tributary relationships; others believed exemplary violence was necessary to prevent complete collapse.

One of the most severe incidents occurred at Namar, a fortified agricultural town whose council had expelled Scimitar officials but had not yet formally joined the Enclave. Veyr's forces retook the town after a short siege and imposed substantial confiscations on its merchant class. Several council members were executed and a large portion of the grain reserve was removed.

The treatment of Namar had the opposite of its intended effect in several neighboring cities. Enclave propagandists circulated accounts of the executions alongside the published terms offered to associated settlements. Within three months, two previously neutral cities entered Enclave protection.

By the middle of the second year, Veyr faced the strategic problem his predecessors had avoided through decentralized tribute. To maintain authority over rebellious settled populations, the Scimitar increasingly had to occupy them physically. Each garrison reduced the number of mounted troops available for campaigning and created new requirements for food and pay.

The Road to the Field of Blood

The growing rebellion threatened more than Scimitar revenue. If the Enclave consolidated the chain of defecting cities, it would establish a continuous zone of influence deep into territories previously considered part of the Scimitar sphere. Veyr therefore assembled the largest field army of the war in an attempt to break the developing network before it could be permanently fortified.

Exact numbers remain disputed. Scimitar oral traditions dramatically increased the size of the army in later generations, while Enclave accounts tended to inflate enemy strength to magnify the significance of the victory. Modern estimates generally place Veyr's force between forty-five and fifty-five thousand people, of whom perhaps twenty-five to thirty thousand were mounted fighters. The remainder included tributary infantry, camp personnel, laborers, and contingents supplied by allied rulers.

The Enclave army opposing it was much smaller. Approximately twelve to fifteen thousand regular troops were concentrated in the region, supplemented by perhaps six to eight thousand militia and allied soldiers from recently associated towns. Only part of this force possessed standardized Enclave firearms, although the regular army included substantial artillery and specialist rifle units.

Veyr's strategic objective appears to have been the recapture of the Five Markets corridor and the destruction of the main Enclave army supporting it. Success would have severed several newly associated cities from Enclave territory and likely discouraged additional defections. Enclave commanders therefore had strong reasons to accept a major engagement despite being significantly outnumbered.

The battlefield ultimately chosen lay on a broad agricultural plain bordered on one side by a shallow river and on another by low, seasonally wet ground. The area had been cultivated for generations and contained drainage ditches, irrigation channels, field walls, and several raised roads. Enclave engineers had surveyed the district during earlier infrastructure work, giving commanders a comparatively detailed understanding of the terrain.

Later accounts describe elaborate deception intended to lure Veyr into attacking, but the evidence suggests a simpler explanation. The Enclave selected ground where its artillery could operate effectively and where the Scimitar's numerical advantage in cavalry would be difficult to apply simultaneously. Field works were constructed along the principal approaches, existing drainage channels were widened in several places, and artillery positions were established behind low earthen protection. Wagons and timber barriers reinforced vulnerable sections.

The engagement that followed became known as the Field of Blood.

The Field of Blood

The battle was the largest conventional engagement yet fought by the Enclave outside the Granitefist mountains and represented the sharpest collision between Scimitar cavalry warfare and Enclave gunpowder doctrine.

Veyr's forces possessed a substantial numerical advantage and attempted to use it by applying pressure across a broad front while searching for a weak point. The terrain reduced the effectiveness of this approach. Irrigation channels, field boundaries, wet ground, and temporary obstacles broke large mounted formations into narrower bodies as they approached the Enclave position.

Enclave artillery concentrated on these approaches. Heavy guns fired at long range against massed formations, while lighter pieces were positioned to use close-range shot against cavalry attempting to close with the defensive line. Rifle companies targeted officers, messengers, and riders attempting to organize repeated attacks.

The Scimitar launched several major assaults over the course of the engagement. Some reached Enclave positions, and fighting was particularly severe near the central road where field works were less complete. The Scimitar's difficulty lay not in reaching any individual point but in sustaining organized attacks under continuous artillery and firearm fire while moving across constricted terrain.

The presence of large numbers of tributary infantry created additional problems. These troops varied considerably in training and motivation, and several contingents came from regions where rebellion was already spreading. Enclave accounts claim that entire units defected during the battle. This is probably exaggerated, although there is evidence that some tributary troops withdrew without orders once the Scimitar attacks began failing.

The decisive phase occurred after repeated mounted assaults had produced heavy casualties without breaking the Enclave center. Enclave commanders committed their reserves against the Scimitar right, where a failed attempt to cross wet ground had left several formations disorganized. Local allied troops advanced simultaneously from fortified villages on the flank.

The result was not the literal extermination described in later Enclave popular histories, but it was the destruction of Veyr's army as an organized field force. Scimitar formations withdrew across a limited number of usable routes, creating congestion among cavalry, infantry, pack animals, and camp followers. Enclave artillery continued firing into these concentrations while mounted allied units pursued retreating groups for several miles.

Casualty figures are uncertain. Later Enclave chronicles claimed more than twenty thousand Scimitar dead, a number most modern historians consider implausibly high. More conservative reconstructions suggest between eight and twelve thousand killed or mortally wounded and several thousand captured, with additional losses from desertion and the abandonment of equipment. Large numbers of horses were killed, wounded, or captured, which had consequences beyond the immediate human casualties because mounted military power depended upon trained animals as well as riders.

Enclave and allied losses were also considerable, probably between three and five thousand killed and wounded. Several infantry formations in the central sector suffered severe casualties during close fighting.

The importance of the Field of Blood was therefore not that the Enclave suffered little, but that a Scimitar army several times larger failed to overcome a prepared gunpowder force and lost a substantial portion of its most experienced mounted troops in the attempt.

Reports of the battle spread rapidly through the region. Merchants, refugees, surviving soldiers, and Enclave printed accounts carried different versions, but the essential fact was widely accepted: the largest army Veyr had assembled had been decisively defeated.

The political effect was immediate. Several wavering tributary rulers ceased payments, while communities already in revolt became less willing to negotiate restoration of Scimitar authority.

The Scimitar Strategic Shift

Veyr did not repeat the attempt to defeat the Enclave in a major set-piece battle. The remainder of the war saw a return to methods better suited to Scimitar mobility.

Large armies were divided into smaller mounted groups. Rather than attack fortified towns, these forces targeted roads, bridges, survey teams, agricultural estates, isolated mills, and lightly protected supply convoys. Raids were often conducted at night or during periods of poor weather and terminated before Enclave artillery could arrive.

Scimitar forces also began operating farther behind the nominal frontier. Sympathetic pastoral groups provided remounts and information, while local opponents of Enclave incorporation occasionally guided raiders toward supply depots or administrative offices.

These tactics reduced Scimitar losses and imposed growing costs on the Enclave. A regiment stationed behind fortifications could defeat a much larger raiding force if attacked directly, but it could not prevent riders from bypassing it and burning a bridge twenty miles away.

The Enclave responded by increasing the density of fortified posts and expanding patrols, which produced its own problem. Every road secured, settlement incorporated, and city protected increased the number of soldiers required for routine defense.

The war therefore changed character after the Field of Blood. The Scimitar could no longer plausibly restore its entire former tributary system by conventional military victory, but the Enclave could not easily destroy the mobile military society at the center of Scimitar power.

The Third Year

By the third year, both powers were fighting primarily to improve the position from which an eventual settlement would be negotiated.

The Enclave continued incorporating communities along its existing corridors but became increasingly reluctant to accept isolated territories that could not be defended economically. Requests for protection were sometimes delayed until roads or neighboring political agreements made long-term support practical.

Military expenditures rose sharply. Frontier garrisons required regular pay and food, roads damaged by raids needed constant repair, and the production of powder and firearms had to support both the regular army and newly organized local forces. Hospitals in southern cities treated large numbers of soldiers and displaced civilians, while grain reserves were repeatedly used to support populations whose farms had been disrupted by campaigning.

The economic burden was unevenly distributed. Core Enclave territories remained prosperous, and manufacturing expanded because of military demand. Recently incorporated regions experienced far greater disruption. Some communities benefited from military spending and improved roads, while others endured repeated raids, requisitions, and population displacement.

The Scimitar faced more severe demographic and political losses. The Field of Blood had eliminated a substantial number of experienced riders and horses, while continued rebellion reduced tribute revenues needed to replace them. Veyr remained First Rider, but his coalition had been built partly on the expectation that successful conquest would restore the wealth of the riding clans. Three years of war had instead produced heavy losses and a smaller tributary system.

Neither side was close to total collapse. Both were increasingly aware that decisive victory would require costs disproportionate to what remained achievable.

The Truce of Sable Ford

Negotiations resumed late in the third year through intermediaries rather than direct high-level meetings. The memory of Aruk Wells made the Enclave unwilling to send another major delegation into Scimitar territory without extensive security arrangements.

The eventual conference was held at Sable Ford, where both sides maintained camps on opposite banks of a river and negotiations were conducted through controlled crossings. Armed forces remained visible throughout the talks, reflecting the continued absence of trust.

The resulting agreement was explicitly a truce rather than a permanent peace treaty. Neither Veyr nor the Enclave council was prepared to recognize the other's full interpretation of the territorial changes produced by the war.

In practice, however, the settlement froze most of those changes.

The Scimitar ceased attempts to collect tribute from communities already under continuous Enclave protection at the time of the agreement. The Enclave agreed to halt further military support for rebellions beyond a designated line and not to establish new fortified posts deeper into the Scimitar sphere during the truce.

Several associated city-states retained semi-autonomous status rather than being formally annexed to the Enclave, allowing Veyr to avoid recognizing their permanent loss while leaving them effectively outside Scimitar control.

Commercial routes were reopened under a simplified customs system. The fixed transit charges proposed before the war were adopted in modified form, although Scimitar authorities retained greater discretion than the Enclave had originally sought. Both sides agreed to recognized market zones where merchants could trade without armed forces larger than specified escorts.

Prisoners were exchanged, and communities divided by the new frontier received limited rights to seasonal grazing and family travel.

The agreement did not resolve the underlying conflict between the two systems. The Scimitar continued to regard many former tributaries as territories lost during temporary military adversity, while the Enclave regarded their association as legitimate expressions of local political choice. The truce succeeded because neither side wished to continue paying the immediate cost of contesting those claims.

Territorial and Demographic Consequences

The War of the Tributaries transformed the scale of the Enclave more dramatically than the Granite War had done.

Precise population estimates are difficult because many newly associated territories retained their own administrative systems during the first postwar years. Enclave census reconstructions suggest that the population under direct rule or formal protection nearly doubled during the conflict, probably increasing from somewhere in the range of 150,000 to 180,000 before the war to approximately 280,000 to 330,000 afterward.

The increase did not result primarily from natural population growth. It represented the incorporation of agricultural districts, market towns, small city-states, and refugee communities that had previously belonged to or existed at the margins of the Scimitar tributary network.

This expansion greatly increased Enclave resources. The new territories contained farmland, livestock, craftsmen, markets, river crossings, and populations capable of providing soldiers and taxes. They also increased administrative obligations at almost the same rate.

The original Vale had been a compact society of roughly ten thousand people. Even after the incorporation of the Forest People, most Enclave territory could be connected through a gradually expanding road network. The postwar state was geographically more irregular. Some associated cities lay along narrow defended corridors, while others bordered populations that remained loyal to Veyr. Several southern provinces contained substantial pastoral populations whose seasonal movements did not correspond neatly to administrative borders.

The Enclave had therefore gained population faster than it had gained political depth.

This distinction became increasingly important. A census might count a newly associated town as part of the Enclave sphere, but meaningful control required roads, courts, tax officials, physicians, schools, military protection, and communication with the central administration. Building those institutions would take years.

The war also increased the diversity of the Enclave. Many southern communities possessed religious traditions, political structures, languages, and economic systems distinct from those of either the original Vale or the Forest peoples incorporated earlier. The government increasingly relied upon layered forms of citizenship and association rather than attempting immediate uniformity.

The Limits of Victory

Later Enclave histories often portrayed the War of the Tributaries as a straightforward demonstration of the superiority of Enclave institutions over Scimitar militarism. The actual result was more ambiguous.

The Enclave had successfully defended its southern expansion, broken much of the old tributary network, and nearly doubled the population within its political sphere. Its army had demonstrated at the Field of Blood that conventional massed forces could suffer catastrophic losses against prepared artillery and firearms.

It had not defeated the Scimitar as a political or military society.

Veyr remained in power. The riding clans retained substantial territory, military traditions, and influence over numerous communities farther south and east. Their ability to conduct mobile warfare continued to limit Enclave expansion beyond areas that could be connected to fortified infrastructure.

The war therefore reinforced a lesson already visible after the Granite conflict. Technological superiority was most decisive when an enemy accepted forms of warfare that allowed it to be applied efficiently. Granitefist fortresses could be systematically bombarded because they could not move. Veyr's great army could be defeated at the Field of Blood because it concentrated against prepared Enclave positions. Dispersed riders attacking bridges, farms, and convoys presented a much less convenient target.

The Enclave's response had been to expand the infrastructure necessary to reduce the value of mobility, but doing so converted military victory into an expensive administrative commitment.

Red Pressure During the Southern War

The southern conflict also altered the balance of power in the north. Throughout the three years of war, the Red City continued the policy of incremental pressure it had developed during the preceding détente. Enclave leaders, unwilling to fight simultaneously on two major fronts, accepted several compromises that would probably have been rejected under different circumstances.

The first involved the Triridge commercial corridors. Red officials argued that increased bandit activity required larger security forces near protected trade routes. The Treaty of the Triridge prohibited permanent Red garrisons in Granitefist fortresses but did not establish precise limits on forces assigned to commercial protection. The Enclave eventually accepted an increased number of Red-funded guards around several northern depots in return for formal assurances that no heavy artillery would be introduced.

A second dispute concerned the boundary around Stonewake. Several Granitefist villages outside the fortress district had longstanding economic ties to the city but had not been clearly assigned by the treaty. Red-backed Granitefist representatives demanded their removal from Enclave taxation. Rather than risk a northern crisis while major forces were committed south, the Enclave accepted a revised boundary that placed two of the disputed communities outside direct Enclave administration.

The concession was territorially minor but politically important. It demonstrated that persistent pressure could reverse at least some of the settlement created after the Granite War.

Red merchants also expanded their presence within the three Enclave-controlled fortress cities. Commercial privileges negotiated after Triridge allowed Red trading houses to lease warehouses and maintain guards. During the southern war, several of these compounds expanded substantially. Enclave authorities imposed inspection requirements but stopped short of closure because northern metal imports remained economically important.

At the same time, anti-Enclave Granitefist organizations became more active. Groups representing families displaced from Southvault, Stonewake, and Ironmouth circulated claims that the treaty had been accepted under military coercion and should be reconsidered. Enclave intelligence repeatedly found connections between these organizations and merchants operating through Red territory, although evidence of direct Red government control remained incomplete.

A further dispute arose over artillery placement. Enclave engineers had begun strengthening positions overlooking one of the treaty trade corridors. Red representatives argued that the works threatened neutral commerce and violated the spirit of the Triridge settlement. The Enclave eventually agreed to withdraw several visible heavy guns while retaining concealed defensive positions farther from the road.

Taken individually, none of these concessions substantially weakened the northern frontier. Collectively, they shifted the post-Granite settlement in a direction favorable to the Red City and encouraged the belief that the Enclave's attention could be exploited while its armies remained occupied elsewhere.

Intelligence Warnings

By the final months of the Scimitar war, Enclave intelligence reports concerning the Red City became increasingly specific.

Grain purchases in northern markets rose above ordinary commercial demand. Red contractors began acquiring additional draft animals near routes leading toward the Granitefist mountains. Roads that had received little maintenance for years were repaired, including several routes with limited commercial importance but considerable military value.

Mercenary recruiting increased in districts that had previously supplied troops during the Granite War. At the same time, Red commercial compounds near the northern frontier accumulated unusually large food reserves. Official explanations attributed these stores to concerns about instability resulting from the southern war.

Granitefist informants reported meetings between Red representatives and leaders of anti-Enclave factions, including descendants of families displaced from the three captured fortress cities. Some reports claimed that weapons were being distributed secretly. Others described preparations to guide Red forces through mountain routes not controlled by the treaty garrisons.

No single report established that an attack had been ordered. Enclave analysts nevertheless identified a pattern similar to the logistical preparation that had preceded major campaigns elsewhere: concentration of food, repair of roads, recruitment of transport labor, acquisition of animals, and political coordination with local factions capable of disrupting defenses from within.

The timing presented a serious strategic problem. The Enclave had emerged from the Scimitar war larger than at any previous point in its history, but much of that expansion remained only partially integrated. Regular troops were dispersed across the southern frontier, newly associated cities required garrisons, and military stores depleted during three years of campaigning had not yet been completely replaced.

The government therefore began transferring experienced units north as soon as the Sable Ford truce made their withdrawal possible. Powder production increased, northern granaries were filled, and the concealed artillery positions prepared during the earlier détente were returned to full readiness.

Even these measures could not address the central difficulty. The Enclave's expansion had created more resources, population, and strategic depth, but it had also created a state whose borders extended far beyond the compact defensive system Wesley had originally established in the Vale. Its military strength was greater than ever, while its obligations had expanded still faster.

Later historians have therefore treated the War of the Tributaries as both a major Enclave victory and the beginning of a period of dangerous overextension. The Scimitar had failed to reverse Enclave growth and had lost much of its tributary system in the attempt. Yet the conflict had tied down armies, consumed reserves, and encouraged concessions elsewhere at precisely the moment when the Red City was becoming convinced that continued Enclave expansion would eventually threaten its own position.

By the time the southern truce was signed, Enclave leaders no longer debated whether the Red City represented a potential future enemy. Their remaining uncertainty concerned the timing and scale of the expected attack. Reports arriving from the northern frontier during the first weeks of peace suggested that this uncertainty would not last long.