royal house wrote:I thought the two missing chapters where never made they just didn't find the primarch in which case their wouldn't be any space marines. Because in the horus heresy it said horus gather 8 chapter about him while the other remain loyal to the emperor.Therefore no other chapters.

kravus master of Horus wrote:We've waffled on for 3 pages, now lets get back on the horse. Storm, or anyone else, can you PM the other members that have stop posting and ask them to join again? So what do we have on both Legions, scan over the last couple of pages. See what people have agreed on so far and compile them into a list then we will start brainstorming from there.

demonicjapsel wrote:I don't think its right to have space marines with hats made of fur. Maybe more something in their ideals thats russian or something thats leans more toward marxism or perhaps stalism.
It's just a suggestion if you don't like it don't use it

Asherian Command wrote:

demonicjapsel wrote:I don't think its right to have space marines with hats made of fur. Maybe more something in their ideals thats russian or something thats leans more toward marxism or perhaps stalism.
It's just a suggestion if you don't like it don't use it

no.
Do ancient Russians. Like swordsmen knight stuff. Current russian history is bland and evil

kravus master of Horus wrote:

Asherian Command wrote:

demonicjapsel wrote:I don't think its right to have space marines with hats made of fur. Maybe more something in their ideals thats russian or something thats leans more toward marxism or perhaps stalism.
It's just a suggestion if you don't like it don't use it

no.
Do ancient Russians. Like swordsmen knight stuff. Current russian history is bland and evil

I second this idea, do ou think you could post up some history about ancient Russia?

A Brief History of Medieval Russia

[From William Richard Morfill, History of Russia, in Willaim Richard Morfill and Charles Edmound Frye, Russia and Poland (New York P. F. Collier & Son, 1913), pp. 3-15].

A casual glance at the map of Europe and Asia will reveal quite clearly certain of the physical conditions under which Russia has developed. Compared with England, France, or Spain in point of size, what a vast extent of territory is embraced by a single state: running east and west, from the Baltic to the Sea of Kamchatka; and north and south, from the Arctic Ocean to the Black Sea, the Caspian, and, as it may some day appear, the waters of the Indian Ocean. A heritage truly imperial, and offering a greater expanse of continuous land than any other empire. Examined more closely, other features in contrast to the states of western Europe begin to appear. The mountains of Continental Europe lie for the most part in the western and southern quarters. But easterly from the Carpathians, the Continent broadens out into a huge monotonous plain, watered by rivers of considerable length. And were the Ural Mountains correctly appreciatedÑtheir blackness on the ordinary map making them seem much more formidable than they really are, being for the most part only hillsÑit would appear that this vast plain extends almost uninterruptedly from shore to shore of the several bodies of water mentioned above. Scarcely within this enormous expanse of level country is there to be found any one feature which offers itself as a natural frontier or boundary line. The essential unity of the whole, physically, seems to have contributed in no small measure to the political unity which is now fast being achieved.

Glancing at the map from north to south, it will be seen that Russia embraces more degrees of latitude than any other European state, stretching with one arm into the very regions of the Arctic; with the other, into the deserts of central Asia; and changing, by degrees, from the frozen bogs and marshes of the north, through the wooded district of the center, to the steppes of the south. Yet, despite its great size, this territory, in the early history of Christendom, was practically isolated from the rest of Europe. For, when we consider the general commerce and travel of Europe, more particularly in the Middle Ages, it will be seen to what a degree Russia lay outside the established sphere of trade and commercial exchange. Indeed, by the fifteenth century western Europe had grown almost oblivious of the existence of a Slavic state on the Volga; so much so in fact, that in the era of exploration at the close of the fifteenth century, Muscovy underwent a " discovery," and travelers published descriptions of the country with a minuteness appropriate only to a region hitherto unknown.

Turning again to the map for the internal features of the country, it will be seen that, aside from the absence of hills and a " natural " frontier, aside from the vast extent of plain, the most striking thing is a system of rivers, which, with their tributaries, form a complicated network, and allow an easy and almost continuous means of passage throughout the entire country.

It is in connection with one of these waterways that the national history opens. In their original extent, as distinct from the Germans and the Celts, the Slavs occupied portions of the valleys drained by the Elbe, the Oder, the Vistula with some smaller rivers farther east flowing into the Baltic, and the Dnieper flowing into the Black Sea. In the expansion of Germany eastward, after the era of Charlemagne, the Slavs of the Elbe and the Oder fell under German sway and became more or less Germanized. Those of the Vistula, approximately, kept their political independence, and under the name of Poland, formed an integral part of western Christendom. For the Slavs still farther east, along the waterway formed by the Dnieper with the Dwina or the Niemen, a different fate was in store. The waterway was almost continuous from the Baltic to the Black Sea, and afforded passage for traders and Norse adventurers from the different parts of Scandinavia to Constantinople and the Eastern Empire. The Slavs settled in this region were grouped into tribes, and the existence of such trading posts as Novgorod bespoke other pursuits aside from primitive agriculture. It may be assumed that before the ninth century the Norsemen had evinced a design not only to plunder, but also to subjugate the Slavic tribes nearest the Baltic. But if tradition may be relied upon, these early raids svere invariably repulsed. The Slavs refused to pay tribute to the Norse chiefs, and maintained their independence.

Toward the middle of the ninth century the resistance began to weaken, owing perhaps to internal dissension. At last in the year 862, a Norse chief, with his followers, was " invited " to assume the duties of government. His name was Rurik, of the tribe of Russ, and he took up his station in the city of Novgorod. He is the legendary founder of the long line of princes, the Rurikovitches, who governed Russia until the accession of the Romanovs in the seventeenth century.

This early Slavic community over which the Norsemen, or Varangians, came to rule, embraced on the south the upper valley of the Dnieper and its tributaries, with the important cities of Kiev, Chernigov, and Smolensk On the north, it touched Lake Ladoga, and counted among its cities the ancient republic of Novgorod at the head of Lake Ilmen. On the east, it touched the headwaters of the Volga, a fact of political importance, for it was along the Volga valley, by a process of gradual colonization, that the Great Russian, as distinguished from the Little Russian, branch was to develop. To the west, it touched the headwaters of the Dwina, on which stood the city of Polotsk, and the Niemen, both of which rivers in their main streams drained Lithuanian territory. In extent, the whole region was considerably larger than modern Germany, a comparison worth bearing in mind as showing, in view of the later expansion of Russia, the really very large territory with Which the empire started. The absence of any natural frontier inevitably placed the early Slavs in immediate contact with their neighbors. In regard to the latter, it is essential to note the many variations of ethnical type, for in the process of expansion these have been to some degree assimilated, though not without a reciprocal influence upon the Slavic type itself. To the north and east lay a thinly scattered population of Finns; to the south and east, tribes of Turkish origin; to the west, the Lithuanians and also those Slavs whose political adhesion lay with Poland. Had all of these neighbors been a match for the early Russians, the latter might possibly have found themselves confined, early in their history, within limits prescribed by a conventionally settled political frontier. In the case of the Turkish tribes to the south and east, frontier questions did indeed lie between contestants of more or less equal strength, for the ferocity and relentlessness of these warlike nomads, such as the Khazars and the Petcheneks, became proverbial. But between Russian and Finn was a marked inequality of which the Russians took a natural advantage. Under such circumstances the frontier line could not be stationary. It moved constantly at the expense of the Finns, and thus inclined the energies of the early state toward expansion rather than toward cohesion and consolidation.

Political conditions within this gradually expanding community can be classed under no single principle. A primitive form of democracy, in which the precedence of authority was generally conceded to age, may be accepted as a Slavic tradition. This appears not only in the small agricultural communities; but also in such city governments as Novgorod, wherein prevailed a sensitive jealousy of popular rights, guarded by the vetche or republican assembly. The acceptance of a regime of princes signalized by the legendary calling of Rurik, did not mean an acquiescence in irresponsible government. The vetches served as checks to the princes, the undefined relations between the two leading to frequent conflicts. The position of the princes was still further discounted by a pernicious principle of succession, primogeniture not yet being recognized. There developed a system which, to borrow an ecclesiastical phrase, considered the country as divided into so many dioceses, the " see " of Kiev being reserved for the grand prince. In case of the death of a grand prince, the dignity fell, not to the eldest son, but to the " eldest " of the family, to an uncle or a brother as the case might be. It added to the confusion of this system that the death of a grand prince necessarily altered the position of the surviving members of the family, by changing the number of degrees in which each stood from the eldest. As the same principle of succession applied to each of the separate divisions, the result was a more or less continuous shifting from one division or seat to another. A time came when there were four or five times as many princes as principalities to be filled, a condition which was not without its influence probably in prompting the more adventurous and aggressive of the unprovided princes to found new principalities of their own by acquiring land at the expense of the Finns.

The work of the princes was conspicuous chiefly on its military side. A band of armed warriors, called a drujina, grouped itself around each prince to follow the fortunes of war. Personal loyalty seems to have played little part in this relation. Each warrior felt himself free to change from one master to another according to circumstances. This principle, coupled with the tradition of political decentralization, may partly explain the chaos of internal strife presented by the annals of the period. Lack of union and subordination, unless counteracted by the personal influence of some great prince, led to weakness even in the face of the enemy. But the military undertakings of the period are full of interest. In the ninth and tenth centuries a series of expeditions carried the Russians to the very walls of Constantinople itself. The eastern emperors were glad to disarm the hostility of these invaders by grants of trading privileges, by bribes of money, and by employment as mercenaries against the Bulgarians. More urgent, however, was the situation nearer home. Particularly with the Turkish plainsmen, the Polovtsi and Khazars, to the southeast, relations were invariably hostile, and marked by continual border warfare. Raid was met by counterraid, nor were the advantages always with the Russians. But to the northeast conditions seem to have been more favorable, for the Russians began slowly to make their way down the Volga valley.

The armed expeditions to ConstantinopleÑan ominous precedent for later history perhapsÑwere incidental to more subtle relations between the Byzantines and the Russians. Constantinople became the fountain head of the religion, art, and literature which brought Russia within the pale of civilization. It is worth noting, in this connection, that in point of time, the adoption of Christianity by the new state came comparatively late, for whereas the spiritual foundations of western Christendom had long been fixed, it was not till the very close of the tenth century that the Grand Prince Vladimir at Kiev demolished the images of the heathen gods and ordered the population of the city into the stream of the Dnieper to receive baptism at the hands of the Byzantine missionaries. Novgorod and other cities following suit, in a short time the Greek faith was professed by the whole nation. Further, the adoption of the Byzantine communion insured an almost total separation from the spiritual and intellectual life of western Christendom, a separation for which the geographical situation of early Russia was primarily responsible. Following in the footsteps of her Byzantine teachers Russia grew farther and farther apart from the West, remaining a stranger to all the virility of the movement which expressed itself in the manifold phases of chivalry, Gothic art, and municipal independence. The nation fell under the more or less sterile influence of Byzantine tradition: an unfortunate equipment, indeed, with which to face the blight of later political subserviency to the Tatars.

In the confused political system, noted above, the city of Kiev on the Dnieper retained its prestige as the seat of the grand prince for about four centuries. Its fortunes were at their height during the eleventh century under Yaroslav the Great (10I61054), but began to decline after Vladimir Monomachus (11131125). In the meantime, on the upper Volga, there developed from the gradual extension of the frontier through military colonization, a population of frontiersmen who knew not the traditions of Kiev and Novgorod. Frontier life was much to the advantage of the princes. The advance of the Russians up the Volga went on at the expense of the Finns, and this necessitated an armed occupation of each new strip of land acquired. The initiative lay with the princes who, with their drujinas, or armed bands, wrested the land from the original inhabitants, and protected the settlers, to whom they granted the privilege of occupation. Thus the conditions under which these new principalities were created tended to exalt the position of the prince and fostered the assumption of an autocratic power which has flourished with varying degrees of vigor ever since. But frontier life along the Volga did more than further autocracy; by the mixture of Russian and Finn it promoted the development of a new ethnical type. The assimilation of the Finns brought to the Russian settlers certain mental characteristics such as steadfastness, and fatalism, perhaps, which slowly differentiated them from the original type on the Dnieper. The Volga became the cradle of a new type of Slav, known historically as the Great Russian, in distinction from the Little Russian of Kiev. New Russia, the country of the upper Volga, thus stood in contrast to the old Russia of Kiev and Novgorod.

Eventually the two were brought into conflict. The time came vhen the succession to the dignity of grand prince fell to the Prince of Suzdal. Rather than take up his residence in Kiev, the new grand prince preferred to remain in his own principality on the Volga. This defiance of all tradition was nowhere more resented than in Kiev itself. It required an army from the north to bring the " Mother City " to terms. Henceforth the title of grand prince, no longer associated with Kiev, begins to lose its old meaning. It is even assumed by two or three princes at a time, indicating a still greater degree of political chaos, which the stern conditions of life on the Volga did little either to soften or to simplify.

To what extent the pushing forward of the frontier and the creation of new principalities might have gone on in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries will always be a matter of conjecture. With the thirteenth century there begins a fateful period. Geographicallya Russia happened to lie directly in the line of advance of other states whose expansion in these two centuries brought to the immediate frontier enemies with which a group of principalities loosely held together, could scarcely cope on equal terms.

This was a very warlike period and, according to the Russian historian M.S.Solovjev, Russia was involved in over 300 conflicts between 1228 and 1462, resulting in 85 full-scale battles. Two hundred of these conflicts involved external enemies - Tatar-Mongols, Lithuanians, Swedes or Teutonic Knights - resulting in 60 battles. If we add at least 150 attacks on fortresses and more than 80 sieges of Russian towns, it becomes clear that there was no prolonged period of peace during these two and a half centuries. Although Russian trade, handicrafts and culture survived, more than 200 years of more or less continual bloody conflict inevitably left their mark on the Russian character. While vast territories were harassed by the Mongols, Russia's military culture continued to develop rapidly, while there was also considerable external influence. During the mid-13th century, for example, the south-western principality of Galich-Volhynia experienced a notable increase in military power. From c.1240 infantry became more prominent and started to participate in combat on an equal footing with cavalry. The Ipatjev Chronicles for 1249, 1251 and 1253 showed that infantry often decided the outcome of such clashes. Furthermore, this southern Russian army now included people from more varied social backgrounds, including townsmen and peasants. Instead of the old term druzina (military detachment), troops tended to be called merely 'riders', peshtsi or foot soldiers, or simply vois - 'warriors' - while the supporting mounted archers were called streltsi.

Asherian Command

kravus master of Horus wrote:

Asherian Command

So what can we use in a legion from this? Might end up close to space wolves if we're not careful.

Father Gabe wrote:Possible Spoiler Alert

Okay not much of an alert, if you have listen to the audio book (horus heresy one...cant remember which) or read the recent The First Heretic book, you will get a few more clues on the missing Legions. However, it is vague still on who or what they were. I doubt we will ever know, GW has hinted/said as much.

For me I got to think about the Rogue Trader days and earlier books mentioned the reason why females couldnt be Space Marines. I cant remember the exact verbage. After the horus heresy collection started I followed through with my project: Sol Templars. We know a tragedy falls on the 2 missing legions, and recently learn that some of the other legions had a hand in exterminating them. My legion is the 2nd (Eve came second ) Legion and are female. They were nearly wiped out but some remain throughout the galaxy.

Asherian Command wrote:Nah. One missing legion probably went traitor.
The other stayed loyal probably.
And they loyal one was sent to hunt down the Traitor Legion.

Yggdrasil wrote:I agree with Father Gabe... Someone must have tried it out there, that's for sure...

Father Gabe wrote:Possible Spoiler Alert

Okay not much of an alert, if you have listen to the audio book (horus heresy one...cant remember which) or read the recent The First Heretic book, you will get a few more clues on the missing Legions. However, it is vague still on who or what they were. I doubt we will ever know, GW has hinted/said as much.

For me I got to think about the Rogue Trader days and earlier books mentioned the reason why females couldnt be Space Marines. I cant remember the exact verbage. After the horus heresy collection started I followed through with my project: Sol Templars. We know a tragedy falls on the 2 missing legions, and recently learn that some of the other legions had a hand in exterminating them. My legion is the 2nd (Eve came second ) Legion and are female. They were nearly wiped out but some remain throughout the galaxy.

Yggdrasil wrote:Well, Maledictus, I also tend to think the way you do, ie. I don't think any female SM ever existed, but I wouldn't be overreacting over such a thing.

The main reason, to me, is : who says that the process of making SM requires a Y chromosome? The mighty adepts of the AdMech? The totalitarian regime known as the Imperium?

They don't even know how a stub gun or a flashlight work, so couldn't they be wrong about that? Is it something the AdMech adepts know for sure, or is it related to a tradition?
Does the Imperium know for sure, or is it another fascist aspect of its regime?

Who could tell?

Maledictus wrote:
As for the Imperium being fascist yes, it certainly is; what it is not however, is sexist. We have examples in the fluff of female inquisitors, rogue traders, naval and IG commanders, arbites, guardsmen, governors etc...I mean seriously the fact that the Sisters of battle use the exact same equipment as the space marines, but not geneseed should tell you something. Sorry if i seem harsh or ranty, I'm not, my only aim is to clear up a misunderstanding that people have regarding this bit of fluff. especially since it pops up so often