Adventure of Sinbad

TL;DR: Their world and monarchies are predicated upon nepotism and pure lineage, whereas ours have evolved to the point where meritocracy is accepted and even supported. Don't confuse the two.

I would've understand why the characters have such belief, if not because this is friggin Magi and we had just seen a guy splitting the earth like it's no big deal. Monarchy is convenient because it's an established system that no one will question and hence there will be less uprising and d'etat happening every time the former king passed away, but when you're so fking badass that literally only a handful of person can kill you, legitimacy really doesn't mean jack sht as much as the loyalty of your subject, which conveniently isn't much problem for our dear Sinbad.

Tbh, the biggest puzzle here is just how will Sinbad convince enough population to be his citizens? I mean, how the hell did he managed to skip the entire villaging process and get his village promoted straight into a country?

These essays comments need spoiler tags...

Spoiler

Royal Blood don't exist, like I said, at one point in time everyone was a peasant. Hideyoshi was a peasant and became emperor,  many old kingdoms in the middle east were formed by nomads, meaning no Royal blood there either. before a kingdom was born there were no Royals or Nobles, unless that new Kigdom cam from remnants of an older kingdom.

 

Even Liu Bei had diluted Blood, and using his Royal Blood is merely an excuse cause he would never become a king either way, Sun Jian had that right cause he had the seal of the emperor, Liu Bei didn't. Hence why his family attacked him, ending in the death of Shu's second strategist, he became a king by merit not by blood. Cao Cao, was a noble but he was not married to a royal and so, it makes no diference, no royal blood either This already kills you argument and you want to continue? What about Sima Yi? He founded the Jin Dynasty, no royal either.

 

Once again, there's no such thing as Royal Blood, Royal Blood is only needed to inherity your family's country, or a royal's country(in case you're a noble marrying into a royal family). Royal Blood is not required to build a Kingdom in lands that belong to no one else but you, no other King would oppose if you called yourself King then, they had neither the right, nor the autority to meddle in someone else's lands, and not the desire either.

 

"If you have a tribe, means you are already a chieftain..." And who formed that tribe ,huh? God?

Sinbad has no people of his own yet, he could easily form a tribe by using refugees of some other country, or by just attracting nomads to his lands,  and be it's chief if he so wanted. And in Tribes, meritocracy works, there are even rules for this kind of thing, like duels in some cases, or simply by proving your superiority through other means... Just a reminder

Why do you always skip the key parts of the various histories you bring up? Yes, Hideyoshi is a peasant, but his ascendency to kanpaku (not emperor) was also one of close relationship to create his royal blood... 1. Had to intermarry with the daughter of Nobunaga, Yodo-dono, to try to solidify the loyalty of Nobunaga's old lieutenants that capitulated to him, (Just as Selendine suggested that the only way for Sinbad to be a true royal is to marry her) and 2. Had to get a forged lineage and subsequent adoption to the Fujiwara clan to justify his ascendency to the position of Kanpaku - the thing you called emperor (just as even Tokugawa had to forge his relationship to the Seiwa Genji - aka. emperor's descendents - to get recognition as Seii Daishogun) and his reign was ALWAYS unstable, which is why it fell apart so quickly after his death, despite all the effort he took to maintain it, because his blood is too peasanty to hold the realm together...

Royal blood is not actual hemoglobin, so you are right in that regard, but rather royal blood is a concept, and can be equated to noble blood for all intent and purposes, and despite your shaky arguments, do exist.

As far as the Three kingdoms goes, seriously, read the works more closely... The imperial seal have no bearing on the concept of royal blood, but rather mandate of heaven, and honestly speaking, no one other than the Yuan brothers really cared about that piece of stone, to the point that when Yuan Shu declared him emperor with that seal, it lead to his downfall. Sun Jian's empire was built not upon the stone, but rather upon his lieutenants and his marital connections to the various local estate owners of Wu. His marriages, through the Qiao family, the Lu family, and the Zhou family, who were major landowners of the Wu region, is what solidified his rule, as I have said before.

Liu Bei, dilute or not, was able to rally his followers together because of his "imperial uncle"'s designation, otherwise, Zhuge Liang could've just easily replaced the weak Liu Shan, simply because of the importance of the Liu clan, regardless of how dilute it is... (p.s. Liu Bei's dilute blood, despite what you are thinking as useless banter, actually helped him rise multiple times... The reason why Tao Qian yielded his province of Xu to Liu Bei, why Liu Biao allowed Liu Bei to take refuge in his province of Jin when the latter lost the province of Xu to the invasion of Cao Cao, why Liu Zhang invited Liu Bei into the province of Shu before Liu Bei initated the coup that got him his eventual "three-kingdoms" realm, was ALL because of his blood as an imperial scion...)

And finally, Nomads in the many "old kingdoms" in the middle east... Oh another can of worms huh... I'll move this discussion with this magical "tribe" thing you so fervently deny...

A tribe by its very design is a kin-group... the various turkic nomads that formed the "old kingdoms" you speak of are these kin-groups, or extended families... The family's patriarch slowly evolved into the concept of chieftain, with the younger brothers protecting the family's interest, either through fighting or working... These patriarchs' direct descendents intermarry with the descendents of other patriarchs, whose "blood" is roughly half and half of each patriarch's brothers, thus exist as a compromise of the two families, and was able to unite the interests of the two families into a larger tribe... And with many generations, you soon have a thing called a huge arse tribe that have thousands upon thousands of constituents, with the chieftain, not one magically endowed by god, but by being just the right ratio of marriages to all the constituents to be willing to support... That is your so-called "magically created tribe"

Other than the "relatives of the prophet" during the islamic conquests, all the previous "nomadic" tribes you speak of solidified their rule through marriage with the existing persian nobility and royalty... Alexander the Great and his lieutenants married the sons and daughters of the Persian Nobility, the Seljuk Turks in turn also married the preexisting persian nobility... They needed the "royal blood" that you so vehemently deny in their descendents to solidify their rule over their new realms...

Your so called "not royal but merely noble," again, like the kingdom of bohemia, noble and royal are the same thing, just mere syntax... Just because Cao Cao and Sima Yi arn't the royal lineage, doesn't mean they don't have "royal blood"... Cao Cao's Clan is over a thousand members in size, and basically covers over half of his top commanders, such as Cao Ren, Cao Zhen, and the Xiahou brothers. Sima Yi was a marquis through his father, and had just an extensive marriage web to the various constituents of Cao Wei, if you so care to bother reading up on it at all...

Just saying "kills your argument" without proper thesis doesn't actually kill the argument, and you sound awfully like you are in denial...

Once again, you are free to go out alone, carve out a virgin land to declare as your kingdom that no one will challenge, or sometimes even meddle with. It doesn't make you anymore a king than a hermit... If you wish to be a king in the truest sense, it is not just the territory, but moreso the commoners that are willing to toil and invest in your autocracy; such connection only become truly established through pacts of blood by generations of marriage by the leaders of each community, and that is the basis of the concept of royal blood.

In a very unique way, "royal blood" is basically a biological form of "representative government," the royal blood represent, by marriage, a documented connection with ALL the constituents of the kingdom, thus by kinship a relative to everyone from the highest noble to the lowest peasant... while the same cannot be said of a random peasant, either by the lack of documentation, or by the lack of marriages outside his/her immediate neighborhood to encompass a part of everyone in the kingdom.

what happened to spoiler tags?

If you have a tribe or a company, manage to find some unknown territory that doesn't belong to anyone, and guide your Tribe/company there.

It doesn't matter whether other countries want to believe or not, you are already a King. Your argument could work in case said person manages to get their own territory inside another country, and manages to strike a deal with said country to become independent.

 

However, when you get a territory that doesn't belong to anyone, much less other people ever knew about it, and you have enough power to protect that territory and your people, no one get a say about you not having what it takes to be a King, much less complain about the likes of royal blood. There's enough precedent of this happening, especially because that lands is yours by right. Otherwise no one would ever have the right to call themselves kings.

 

All kingdoms had a similar story, a leader found some free territory, built a kingdom there, and upon being recognized by their people he became a King. Hell, just remember what happened during the Three kingdoms era. Neither of the three leaders had an ounce of royal blood in them, but all three(Cao Cao, Liu Bei, Sun Quan) became kings and they didn't even marry princesses of the royal family(Oh, but Sun Jiang, Quan's father, had the seal, he could've become the Emperor even withough royal blood if he so wanted, he had that right, unfortunately his own loyalty got in the way.).

 

Sinbad is even halfway done, he's already being recognized by more than three Kingdoms. Any other country complains, he just have to use his alliance, and deal with it. As of now he only needs people and a territory to be a king.

XD, funny you have to mention the three kingdoms; because the entire reason why Liu Bei was able to consolidate his power was due to his royal blood. He was, after all, the direct descendant of Emperor Jing of Han Dynasty; to the point that he was known in the RoTK as "imperial uncle."

Cao cao may not be an imperial scion, but his father was the adopted heir of the chief eunuch of Emperor An, who was enfeoffed as a marquis. So Cao cao is still considered part of the nobility, although not royalty.

Sun Quan is... well, not of noble blood in the Han Dynasty sense, but technically inherited the entire empire carved out by his brother and father... And as I will expand on later, built upon his blood relations to the local powers, such as the Zhou (Brother-in-law Zhou Yu), Lu (Nephew-in-law Lu Xun), and Qiao (Sisters-in-laws) families.

Beware of predications..."if you have a tribe" means that you are already the chieftain. (Think of the stem duchies of HRE and such, Duke of Swabia or Suebi, Duke of Franconia or Franks, Duke of Bavaria, Duke of Saxony or saxons, etc etc. are all historical chieftains of their specific germanic tribes) If you are a chieftain of a tribe, then you are de facto the king of the tribe. So the logic kinda loops from there. (You are already a chieftain/king, so if you call yourself a king, it doesn't matter what anyone says, you are already de facto king) The concept of king is highly fluid, to add on to your thought, it doesnt even matter if you are independent or not, the duke of bohemia got elevated to kingship simply because "it looked better on my resume," all that mattered was that he was the leader of the land and people of bohemia.

All kingdoms are of similar story, but not entirely like you said, a king's family intermarries between the other leaders, thus his "blood" is related to all the other powerful and influential, so that the powerful and influential beings, commanding their own followers would follow him as their king. The weakest kings in history are those that are without influential familial relations, such as the early capetian kings, who despite being the nominal overlord from normandy to spain, only had control of ile-de-france, basically paris. They married their way, through half a dozen of generation, to the landed gentry of their predecessor and landing their own sons to fiefs they took through intrigue, before any semblance of a kingdom arose. Hell, just remember the war of the roses, the entire reason why the tudor dynasty was able to end  the conflict was by a marriage between scions of the two warring houses.

In conclusion, yes, everyone is free to call themselves kings, but a king without a tribe/people is not a real king. Real kings in history pride their "royal blood" on the fact that it have some component to all the other strong and powerful in the kingdom. Selendine is right, a king with the right mixture of blood technically only needs to "be there" because the strong and powerful, in a desire to balance their interests against other strong and powerful, will compromise through the relation to the "royal blood." And it is not the king who runs a country, but rather the strong and powerful, be them nobility or bourgeois. For the best historical precedence, just look at the tudor kings.

p.s. The loners that get their own territory and protect it from others are called hermits, not kings.

The reason why the royal blood argument works is because given the current circumstances, it's difficult to believe that any non-royal, much less peasant, can ascend a throne and be called a "king". Sure, you can self-proclaim yourself as a king and have a "kingdom", but it's pretty difficult to get any kingdom to recognize you, seeing as there is no precedent for someone to become king without the blood necessary. It's easy for us to say "we don't need royal blood" because our society has grown past such archaic nepotism, but expecting the world described in Magi and AoS to accept such a thing would be a much taller task.

TL;DR: Their world and monarchies are predicated upon nepotism and pure lineage, whereas ours have evolved to the point where meritocracy is accepted and even supported. Don't confuse the two.

If you have a tribe or a company, manage to find some unknown territory that doesn't belong to anyone, and guide your Tribe/company there.

It doesn't matter whether other countries want to believe or not, you are already a King. Your argument could work in case said person manages to get their own territory inside another country, and manages to strike a deal with said country to become independent.

However, when you get a territory that doesn't belong to anyone, much less other people ever knew about it, and you have enough power to protect that territory and your people, no one get a say about you not having what it takes to be a King, much less complain about the likes of royal blood. There's enough precedent of this happening, especially because that lands is yours by right. Otherwise no one would ever have the right to call themselves kings.

All kingdoms had a similar story, a leader found some free territory, built a kingdom there, and upon being recognized by their people he became a King. Hell, just remember what happened during the Three kingdoms era. Neither of the three leaders had an ounce of royal blood in them, but all three(Cao Cao, Liu Bei, Sun Quan) became kings and they didn't even marry princesses of the royal family(Oh, but Sun Jiang, Quan's father, had the seal, he could've become the Emperor even withough royal blood if he so wanted, he had that right, unfortunately his own loyalty got in the way.).

Sinbad is even halfway done, he's already being recognized by more than three Kingdoms. Any other country complains, he just have to use his alliance, and deal with it. As of now he only needs people and a territory to be a king.

Sinbad and the Shouta Alliance.

Now everyone needs those keychains.

Celendine is right but I still hate her. I actually hate her more because the mangaka keeps shittily teasing her and Sin rather than having her be an independent bitch.

there are many people who have taken the throne by force historically

My money on who defeats Selendine, it's probably gonna be someone with plot armor, so it's likely to be the current ruler of Parthevia, that military guy. =/

there are many people who have taken the throne by force historically

And most of those who does take the throne by force usually end up having to establish themselves through marriage to "royal blood." Heck, even with the meteoric prowess of alexander the great, he and his subordinates still had to marry into the original persian royalty to have any semblance of stability.

The reason why the royal blood argument works is because given the current circumstances, it's difficult to believe that any non-royal, much less peasant, can ascend a throne and be called a "king". Sure, you can self-proclaim yourself as a king and have a "kingdom", but it's pretty difficult to get any kingdom to recognize you, seeing as there is no precedent for someone to become king without the blood necessary. It's easy for us to say "we don't need royal blood" because our society has grown past such archaic nepotism, but expecting the world described in Magi and AoS to accept such a thing would be a much taller task.

TL;DR: Their world and monarchies are predicated upon nepotism and pure lineage, whereas ours have evolved to the point where meritocracy is accepted and even supported. Don't confuse the two.

there are many people who have taken the throne by force historically

I reckon the only way Sinbad to get Zepar is Celedine dies (i guess it's obvious) But who's gonna kill her? Or do they merge into one being?!!!

This story is canon, but I doubt the marriage goes through

Anyone who has read Magi, aka everyone on this forum, would know that Zepar is one of Sinbad's djinn in the main manga.

I totally wish them getting married was cannon. X_X

I totally wish them getting married was cannon. X_X

 
a kingdom can't be a kingdom without royalty; the people who established the kingdoms grew out of conflicts borne of tribalism, and the family that won out in the end took charge. The 'Royal Blood' was a symbol of the family's power and strength that over time they'd managed to bring the country together, which is why that Royal Blood is so important. The way royalty works is that a king or queen ideally has multiple children who then compete with each other to gain the right to the throne; this means that usually only the best or the most cunning of the children will take the reigns.

Yes, you will have corruption via some opportunistic advisors and chancellors who try to twist situations in their favour, but the mark of a good king or queen is being able to discern whether or not the suggestions made by such people will be of any benefit to their country, which in the vast majority of cases is exactly what happened. You also have to remember that no governmental system is free of corruption, so trying to implement a system based on thinning it out is utter folly, especially if the system itself is ineffectual at ensuring a country's prolonged stability.

She literally said the a king merely have to exist, he has to be there, even without proper skills.

And like I said, Royal Blood= Lineage of the first leader, meaning, by creating his own country Sinbad WILL become a King with "royal blood", royal blood is not a rare blood composition that gives people unique abilities, it's literally just the lineage of the country's creator.

 
a kingdom can't be a kingdom without royalty; the people who established the kingdoms grew out of conflicts borne of tribalism, and the family that won out in the end took charge. The 'Royal Blood' was a symbol of the family's power and strength that over time they'd managed to bring the country together, which is why that Royal Blood is so important. The way royalty works is that a king or queen ideally has multiple children who then compete with each other to gain the right to the throne; this means that usually only the best or the most cunning of the children will take the reigns.

Yes, you will have corruption via some opportunistic advisors and chancellors who try to twist situations in their favour, but the mark of a good king or queen is being able to discern whether or not the suggestions made by such people will be of any benefit to their country, which in the vast majority of cases is exactly what happened. You also have to remember that no governmental system is free of corruption, so trying to implement a system based on thinning it out is utter folly, especially if the system itself is ineffectual at ensuring a country's prolonged stability.

And your argument goes against her views, you know that right,?She's said that a king doesn't have to be a good one, just exist there

And also Royal blood is bulshit, Royal blood was created out of necessity, one leader decided to rise into a position that allowed him to ensure his people's future, thus he found a land where his people could settle and created a kingdom, he then became a king, and only after all that did "royal blood" become a thing. Meaning, Sinbad can indeed become a King without Royal blood, because royal blood is nothing but the lineage of the man who created the country, of the first leader.

And remember the first kingdoms weren't built by royal blood, there were no royals, no nobles, no merchants back them. A kIng is there to make sure every things goes where it's supposed to, a Royal Idol would only see things happening and try to fix, but without proper knowledge or skills he would fail to notice plots and any other internal problems. Her views on Kings is a bit biased and fail to consider that other people(ministers, senators and other politicians) can be easily corrupted, leading a country to ruin.

 
a kingdom can't be a kingdom without royalty; the people who established the kingdoms grew out of conflicts borne of tribalism, and the family that won out in the end took charge. The 'Royal Blood' was a symbol of the family's power and strength that over time they'd managed to bring the country together, which is why that Royal Blood is so important. The way royalty works is that a king or queen ideally has multiple children who then compete with each other to gain the right to the throne; this means that usually only the best or the most cunning of the children will take the reigns.

Yes, you will have corruption via some opportunistic advisors and chancellors who try to twist situations in their favour, but the mark of a good king or queen is being able to discern whether or not the suggestions made by such people will be of any benefit to their country, which in the vast majority of cases is exactly what happened. You also have to remember that no governmental system is free of corruption, so trying to implement a system based on thinning it out is utter folly, especially if the system itself is ineffectual at ensuring a country's prolonged stability.

Maybe you should read before writing this wall, because it makes you look stupid since it's beside the point I wanted to make.

nice ad hominem fam, but where's your argument?

Poor Drakon ;_;

Spoiler