Talk:Centauri (Babylon 5)

Inconsistencies

In the "Homeworld" section it says: The main parliamentary body is called the Centarum, though it is unknown how much actual power it wields. but then in the next section on government it says : (...) but it is clear that while the emperor has great personal influence and important ceremonial roles, true power resides in the Centarum.

This should be clearified somewhat IMHO. If I recall corectly the Empreor's power is pretty much absolute (see Cartagia's exploits) if he choose to exersise his power. The only "limit" to the emperor's power is that if he become too unpopular other nobles might conspire to assasinate him (as ineed was Cartagia's fate). A weak willed or comformist emperor on the other hand (like Turhan) is easily controlled by the nobles and/or politicians in the Centaurum (or like in Londo's case an outside influence).

--213.225.64.72 10:02, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Well, I think Cartagia is a difficult case to use to prove anything either way. On the one hand, Refa and his buddies "created" him as a front to their ambitions, and by the time of episode Ceremonies of Light and Dark Refa admits to Londo that his ultimate plan is to become emperor himself, so Cartagia is presumably merely a temporary resident of the throne. On the other hand, once Refa is removed by Londo (in And the Rock Cried Out, No Hiding Place) later on in season 3, we can assume that it is from that point onwards that Cartagia becomes more powerful.

It's also important to remember that Turhan had a prime minister, suggesting that his power was channeled through or wielded by an appointed or elected member of the Centaurum. The prime minister must be a significant figure within the government, or Refa's men wouldn't have murdered him. By getting rid of the prime minister when Turhan died, Refa was able to control both the "executive" and the "legislative" branches of government, I suppose, i.e., the throne and the Centaurum.

So basically where the Centaurum is strong (or bits of it are, at least) the emperor is limited in power by convention or politics, but where the Centarum is weakened, that's when the emperor can act more directly. Cheers, Neale Neale Monks 07:52, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Another inconsistency: the article claims that the Xon were eradicated in 262 AD, that Emperor Tuscano was installed shortly thereafter, and that the Shoggren invasion was already over "in the last years of Tuscano's rule," which I assume to be late 3rd-early 4th century. But the next section claims that the Shoggren invasion took place during the first Shadow war, which took place around 1260 AD, a good thousand years later. Since I've never read the books (where I assume this information comes from), however, I have no way of knowing which it is.

The Centauri got their technology from the Shoggren after their invasion in the final months of Tuscano's rule (Londo refered to him as the one who defeated them in day of the dead) and when they used this technology to get into space they had sporadic encounters with the reminants of the Drakh fleet. So they must have gained space travel near or just after the end of the first shadow war when the shadows forces where in their final retreat, thus suggesting to me that the Shoggren invasion happened just before or during that war. Nubula 18:02, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Btw, I believe the correct spelling is "Centaurum," not "Centarum" as currently stands. No source, though, so someone should confirm this one way or the other before editing it. -- MikhailM 24.174.138.187 19:14, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Although that is unclear from the Babylon 5 episodes themselves, I would assume the relationship between the emperor and the Centaurum in the Centauri Republic probably mirrored that between the emperor and the Senate in the early centuries of the Roman Empire on Earth. In other words, I would imagine that, even though the Centauri emperor was an autocrat who had full control over the government and the military, he still needed the formal approval of the Centaurum to pass legislation and possibly appropriate public money. Also, to keep the fiction of a nominal republican constitution, I would speculate that there was no automatic rule of succession to the office of emperor; instead, a new emperor would have to be acclaimed/elected by the Centaurum whenever the throne was vacant. Although it would be customary for a sitting emperor to nominate his son or a close relative as his successor, the hereditary principle or a strict line of succession based on family ties did not necessarily have to be observed, as shown by the fact that the Centaurum chose Vir Cotto, a minor nobleman, to succeed Londo Mollari as emperor, by-passing the young Dius Vintari who was the surviving son of the deceased emperor Cartagia. 161.24.19.112 (talk) 19:14, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

British Empire

As someone who does not know the series, I was wondering if the comparisons to the British Empire are actually quotations from The Gathering episode of the series. If so then I suppose that is fair enough. However I would dispute some of the claims made, the description of Britain being a "tourist attraction" is perhaps unfair when used to describe the 6th largest economy in the world. Perhaps the Pyramids of Egypt are a better example of a tourist attraction in what was once a great empire but now a country heavily dependant on foreign aid? Although the United Kingdom is not "feared" around the world this paragraph slightly contradicts Wikipedia's own descriptions of the British armed forces;

"(The British) Army is one of the most technologically advanced land forces in the world, and is deployed in many of the world's war zones as part of a fighting force, and in United Nations peacekeeping forces."

"(The Royal Navy) remains the largest Western European navy, and one of the world's most technologically advanced."

"the RAF is one of the largest air forces in the world. It is also one of the world's most technologically advanced air forces."

And the line "did not pick on worlds that could fight back" is perhaps not a fair charge against the British Empire considering its conflicts with France, Russia, the German Empire and then the Third Reich. Apologies for my moaning about this, but I do not believe that as of 2005 the paragraph is particularly correct. Although perhaps one has to look at it from the perspective of the year 2500?

Very true. The once "powerful" Centauri are now weak and latching onto the growing power of the Earth alliance (U.S.). VERY similar in history. Such as the Klingons were the Soviets in the original Star Trek episodes.

-G

This is why I added that section with the quote from JMS, the show's creator. He expressly had the British Empire (and perhaps certain other European empires, e.g. Romans, Napoleonic France) in mind when creating the Centauri. So while you may have arguments with that parallel, that's largely irrelevant given that the show's creator saw those parallels and used them in the show. The Centauri, by the way, aren't portrayed as feeble or backward, simply no longer the driving force in space politics they once where. But they are still seen as powerful. In "Now for a word", Sheridan explicitly makes the point that the Minbari, Centauri, and Vorlons are all well ahead of the Earth Alliance in terms of military technology. So just like your facts quoted above, the Centauri and the British both have lots of technological advances and military power, it's just that for whatever reason neither uses them in an expansionist way anymore. Cheers, Neale Neale Monks 14:45, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

I don't know what JMS original intention was, but IMHO the Centauri Republic bears little resemblance to the British Empire. Instead, the Centauri government, society, and religion are strikingly similar to those of the old Roman Empire on Earth. 161.24.19.112 (talk) 19:20, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

JMS did indeed use the British Empire as a springboard for the Centauri- however, the Empire he had in mind was that of the early 1900s. The brish empire of htat time spanned the world with trade routes to nearly every major culture of the time and colonies in every hemisphere of the globe. Compare that to now, where the British empire is still a major player in world politics, but doesn't have the extent of power they once wielded. Like the British, the Centauri used to be a leading technological, economic, and military force in the galaxy but as Mollari said himself, "look at us now, 12 colonies and a handful of moons (sic)" The Roman Empire was also an inspiration for the Centauri, thus strengthening the idea of the Centauri as a "declining nation" Edit: forgot to sign my comment. Here you go! 67.162.28.197 (talk) 01:40, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

absurd

why in the hell is this the default article? At the very least it should go to the disambiguation first.Freshraisin 10:41, September 3, 2005 (UTC)

I will move it to Centauri (Babylon 5) as that appears to be the standard. - Randwicked 12:38, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

Oh Jesus, so many redirects to fix... I'm gunna come back later. - Randwicked 12:42, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

I moved it to the disambiguation. It's fairly silly that it the name of a star system should automatically direct to a fictional alien race, however popular it is. --SquidDNA 18:12, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

re: British Empire

Hello,

I wrote that bit, and being British, didn't mean it in any negative way, but more as an illustration of what is, I think, a rather obvious comparison that JMS crafted. There are a lot of Brits who look wistfully at the past (Battle of Britain, Trafalgar, Blenheim, etc.) as the high points of Britain's history. To quote '1066 And All That':

"It was 1918, Britain was no longer top nation, so History came to a full stop."

(A full stop, for our American cousins, is the British English word for a period.)

Egypt isn't the parallel for the Centauri; the Centauri remember remain technically very advanced, having, for example, artifical gravity which both Earth and the Narns lack. They still have a large and effective military and a significant number of colony-worlds. They are wealthy and influential. In no sense are they dependent on anyone, which by Season 5 becomes an important theme as they go into a self-imposed exile and leave the Alliance.

In other words, just as Britain retains technological leadership in some fields (even military ones, as with the Harrier jump jet) so too it isn't technology or wealth that the Centauri lack, but just their old place in history. You could argue that Britain's relative willingness to go into conflicts such as those in Bosnia, Afghanistan, and Iraq has much to do with maintaining the national pride of being a "major player". Just as with the Centauri, there's a part of the British psyche that would like things back "the way they used to be".

As for picking fights, the Centauri expansion, like the expansion of the British empire, was largely through being technically advanced relative to the places they took over. The Centauri occupied agrarian, technologically backward places like Narn; likewise, the British empire expanded into Africa and India rather than Europe or the newly-formed United States.

What makes the Centauri interesting is that unlike the Roman or British empires, the Centauri are offered a chance to "turn back the clock". They take this chance, and the things that befall them afterwards make up a key part of the show.

Regards,

Neale

I personally have seen more in common with the Napoleonic era French Empire then the British Empire.

for instance, the French conquests of Italy and Germany created renewed nationalist feelings in them, like in the case of the Narns.

and the stuff about tourism in Centauri Prime, that is more like France again, as Napoleon's tomb is very well visited, and so is the Louvre, much of its treasures were placed there by Napoleon after he had stolen them from the rest of Europe.

and much of the Roman style stuff I believe is somewhat of a thing to do with the French empire under Napoleon as well, as they imitated Rome to a high level, and I believe what is seen as Roman by you is the French style of imitation of the Romans.

and the former vassals acquiring ambitions of their own: easily the German states that had been forced to ally with Napoleon but soon turned back to their old alliance once he had encountered setbacks.

and I do not see your idea of friendship with the USA as much in the English as with the French. remember Napoleon gave the yanks the Louisiana purchase for dirt cheap. coming from Canada, I have never seen much love between the yanks and brits except when they declared war together on Iraq in 2003. Other then that it was usually resentment as one empire (british) declined and the other grew (USA).

the Centauri Empire grew and shrank a number of times, just like the Napoleonic Empire of France. As can be seen, I feel that it is much more like France then Britain

--Jadger 21:13, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

I concur with your argument, and have changed the section accordingly. Cheers, Neale Neale Monks 11:05, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

After 2278

The After 2278 part of this article includes stuff that I don't ever recall hearing about in the series. I assume it's mentioned in a book, instead? If so, is that book one of the two that are considered canon by JMS? TerraFrost 08:38, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Well, the bits about Vir becoming emperor after Mollari's death are certainly in the show, as is the dinner shortly before Sheridan's death. The bit that isn't in the show is the stuff about how Vir got the Drakh off the planet.

Possibly, the section could be re-structured, with the parts in the show in one paragraph, and then a second paragraph containing the stuff from the books. Cheers, Neale Neale Monks 11:56, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Nubula, Radagast, and recent edits

Justifying changes one way or another isn't all that critical. What matters is that you write up stuff that can be verified. If you're going to write here all about the wars with the Xon, let's see the reference. All the TV show mentioned is that there was a war, it was rough on the Centauri, they eventually won, and now hold festivals and tell jokes about it (episode [The Parliament of Dreams] I think). I don't remember anyone saying anything about "Industrial Age" or "Atomic Age", nor that it occurred during the year 738 BC. Now, I've read and enjoyed Voltayre's web site as much as the next guy, but it's no canon.

What I suggest is we go back and re-write our entries, and for every statement cite the exact episode in each case. In some cases, official JMS statements are useful, too. I've not read the books, but perhaps those, or things like offical RPG gaming materials, could also be pressed into service.

Cheers, Neale Neale Monks 11:27, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

If you look you'll se all I added was that the growing hostility between the Centauri and the Xon morphed into a world war which hit the Centauri hard which was mentioned in the episode you pointed out. Also I stand by my claim that the original version the Xon began attacking and raiding Centauri villages in a regional war. The Xon began a massive campaign to destroy their Centauri cousins in a thousand year war against the Centauri. made little sense as it suddenly jumped from regional wars to world war. I was not attempting to add prose, just trying to bridge two statments. Nubula 16:22, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Personally I didn't know if any of the material included was actually from a canon novel, since there are a few that deal with the Centauri (the Xon are only mentioned briefly once or twice in the series). Even so, a lot of the text seemed very suspect of cruft. If it's actually in one of the novels (I don't recall myself), then it should be properly cited. If it's lifted from a fansite and isn't official, it should be removed. If nothing has been figured out either way in a few days I suggest that the section be scaled back to a mere mention of events "outside" the scale of the show until sources can be found to verify the previous information (it'll be in the history so don't worry). Radagast83 16:37, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

For myself, I love reading the details, but I am sensitive to the fact that without citations anyone could, justifiably, come along and remove them. So let's concentrate on finding the sources. If one of the books mentions the Xon and so on, then let's cite it. Otherwise, it does have to be cut back. And I'd hate to have to do that, because, as I say, I love the show and I love reading up on stuff I wasn't aware of. Cheers, Neale Neale Monks 18:32, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Okay, based on what I found at TIME LINE of the Babylon 5/Crusade Universe, it appears that some Xon information can be found in Babylon 5: The Passing of the Techno-Mages - Summoning Light (2001, ISBN 0-345-42722-X). The site only mentions that it happened around 1200, that a minor noble became emperor because of it, and that of course, the Xon are all dead now. Radagast83 18:48, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

You can also cite JMS himself, on the Lurker's Guide page for the relevant episode. He says that the Xon and Centauri evolved on separate land masses, indepently and to equal intelligence, until one or other of them (he doesn't say which) came up with sea travel. If I recall correctly, there's an explanation that the war happened "about a thousand years ago" by Vir during the festival. I'll have to re-watch the DVD and check. Neale Monks 19:22, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Populaton

Although the Centauri population would eventually grow, by the time the Babylon 5 station opened in 2257 A.D. the population of Centauri Prime was only three billion, which was considerably less than that of the galaxy's other major planets, such as Earth, Narn, or Minbar.

That refers only to population of Centauri Prime, not to the population of Centauri Republic. According to Adeera Tyree (sorry for misspelling if any) in Day of the Dead there are 40 billion Centauri.

--Chris Archer 09:25, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Carved galaxy.jpg

Image:Carved galaxy.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 04:44, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Lady morella.jpg

Image:Lady morella.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 05:24, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Turhan.jpg

Image:Turhan.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 05:00, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Keeper pouch open.jpg

Image:Keeper pouch open.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 09:49, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Prime burns.jpg

Image:Prime burns.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 19:26, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Daggair, Timov, Vir.JPG

Image:Daggair, Timov, Vir.JPG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 19:16, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Accent

There is nothing in the article about the way they talk. I can't make out what the Centauri actors are trying to sound like...Italian? 70.20.160.41 (talk) 22:57, 3 August 2008 (UTC) 68.148.123.76 (talk) 07:44, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Not all Centauri had an accent. I believe the closes Earth accent to Londo's was Romanian (IMO).

In fact, Peter Jurasik just pulled the accent out of thin air when auditioning for the role. The reason no other Centauri share the accent is because none of the actors (with the exception of William Forward, who played Lord Refa) could recreate it. 67.162.28.197 (talk) 01:38, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Centauri are not from Alpha Centauri

I did not know that Centauri are not from Alpha Centauri until reading this article. However, there is no reference to back the claim that this was due to a mistranslation. I found Stellar Geography in the Babylon 5 Galaxy that explains humans first met Centauri within the constellation Centaurus, and thus the confusion. Is there a reference for the mistranslation explanation? MikeBz (talk) 04:36, 25 January 2010 (UTC)