︎
The California Legionary Manual


Edition 1
  1. Proclamation of the Vicennial ᚼ
  2. The California Plan ᚼ
  3. The Legionary System ᚼ
  4. Translatio imperii ᚼ
  5. Pax Californiana ᚼ
  6. The Legion and the Auxiliary ᚼ
  7. The Battalionate System ᚼ
  8. Cotillion ᚼ Intergatheration
  9. The Free Territory ᚼ
  10. Legiondom ᚼ
  11. On War and Militarism ᚼ
  12. 25 Points of the California Legionary Movement

Edition 2
  1. Dictation of the Plenary Alps
  2. On Violence
  3. On Power
  4. On War
  5. 12-23-23
  6. Exemplars of Legiondom
  7. Dream of St. Augustine
  8. Jus ad bellum
  9. St. Francis of Assisi
  10. St. Ignatius of Loyola

Edition 3
  1. First Epistle on Militarian Ethics
  2. Second Epistle on Militarian Ethics
  3. Defenses of Legiondom
  4. The History of the Legion
  5. The Federal Problem
  6. The Cogglehorn
  7. The Parable of the Mountain King
  8. On Imperium and Power
  9. Greater California
  10. The May Update

Edition 4
  1. Ode to California



The Legion —
Info
  1. A militaristic multitude, enlisted or conscripted, for the execution of a common aim; notably foreign legions: an international brigade of volunteers fighting for an agreed purpose or to uphold a common standard, generally ideology bound, rather than national or societal.
  2. The basic unit of the Ancient Roman military, consisting of 3,000-6,000 men.
  3. A vast host, multitude, or number of people or things.
Mark

6. Translatio imperii



Ж



1-24-2024


Translatio imperii is a historiographical concept that was prominent in the Middle Ages, but originated from older concepts.

History is viewed as a linear succession of transfers of imperium that invests supreme power in a singular ruler, an "emperor" (or sometimes even several emperors, e.g., the Eastern Roman Empire and the Western Holy Roman Empire). The concept is closely linked to translatio studii (the geographic movement of learning).

Both terms are thought to have their origins in the second chapter of the Book of Daniel in the Hebrew Bible (verses 39–40).

For Legionary purposes, translatio imperii tracks the transfers of imperium across various epochs to successive caput mundis (world-heads, centers of civilization seen as central for a given era e.g. Rome, Byzantium, Alexandria, Moscow, Paris, etc.) 


  1. Adso of Montier-en-Der (French area, 10th century): Roman Empire → Carolingian Franks → Saxons
  2. Otto of Freising (living in German region): Rome → Franks → Longobards → Germans (Holy Roman Empire)
  3. Chrétien de Troyes (living in medieval France): Greece → Rome → France
  4. Richard de Bury (England, 14th century): Athens → Rome → Paris → England
  5. Ibrahim Pasha (Ottoman Empire, 16th century) Roman Empire → Eastern Roman Empire → Seljuk Empire → Sultanate of Rum → Ottoman Empire
  6. Snorri Sturluson (Prose Edda Prologue, Iceland/Norway, c. 13th century): Troy → Thrúdheim, Thrace → Norway

Translatio imperii in the Legionary tradition pays homage to the simultaneous development of other centers in other continents coinciding with the development of the West.The most complete attempt at properly outlining the legacy of the Legion’s heritage is as follows:

→ Late 4th millenium BC Sumeria
→ The Egyptian Empire
→ Akkadian Empire
→ The Persian Empire
→ The Greek Empire
→ The Roman Empire
→ The Byzantine Empire
→ Christendom
→ The Spanish Empire
→ The French Empire
→ The British Empire
→ The United States of America
→ California

Honorable mentions: The Mongolian Empire, The Russian Empire, The Ottoman Empire, The Islamic Empire, The Qing Empire, The Indus Civilization, The Mali Empire, The Portuguese Empire.

Roman Succession  → Legionary Succession


       In history, Roman succession has been another popular element in the debate over translatio imperii among Western European culturally-influenced powers. Beginning with the transfer of the capital of the Roman Empire from Rome to Constantinople in 330 BC, argument over the true successor of Rome began with the Problem of the Two Emperors wherein the pope refused to acknowledge Empress Irene of Constantinople as the next Roman Emperor and instead crowned Charlemagne King of the Franks the Emperor of Rome. This decision was later argued in letters between Emperor Louis II of France and Emperor Basil I of Constantinople, both of whom refused to recognize the other as Emperor of Rome. According to Basil (though his letter is now lost, it is inferred by historians), Romanitas was determined by a lack of ethnicity, as in the Roman Empire the title of “Roman” was conferred upon any citizen member of Roman society. Louis II being a Frank, Basil argued, meant that he could not be considered Emperor of the Romans. Louis II countered by saying the Pope who controlled the city of Rome had declared him Emperor, that all people have an ethnicity (Romans being the inhabitants of Rome), and that the Byzantines had forfeited all legitimate claim when they fled Rome and moved the capital to Constantinople, which he described as a failure and a flight from responsibility. 
Later contenders of Roman succession include 
Mark
Running on Cargo