Quote Originally Posted by Mjollnir View Post
Ok, now you've displayed a basic misunderstanding of how history works.
I would say not considering multiple sources is a basic misunderstanding of how history works.

So you feel that I shouldn't comment on the tone of your posts, just the content? I explained earlier why I thought that was necessary. I stand by that, so I guess this is another thing we disagree on.
Then you may want not to paint yourself as paladin of courtesy, since you can't avoid resorting to personal attacks, which are the very opposite of courtesy.

Eorzea has not been conquered. It is being threatened. It does not want to be conquered, it wants to remain free. It's people would consider their lives under Garlemald oppressed and controlled. And, speaking of Tacitus, here's a nice summary on that Wikipedia which describes a similar dynamic (hint: it makes mention of Rome).
As a matter of fact part of Eorzea has been conquered (Ala Migho for instance), and in the conquered areas the Garlean empire behaved in a way that's radically opposite to how the Roman Empire behaved in the same situation. Let's not even go into the genocidal aspirations the empire has, that never were part of Roman philosophy.

Again, different political stricture, values, ethos and behavior towards the conquered.

If you want a semi-fitting comparison, you may want to look much nearer in history, which is normal, considering that the FANTASY backstory of Eorzea is built on modern values to appease to a modern public, and not ancient historical ones.

What the writers took from history is the flavor, and nothing else.